mimo-v2.5-pro deep verification model-consistency report
Report ID MZZR202607090555464EF772Generated at 2026/07/09 13:55
Doubtful
mimo-v2.5-pro deep verification result: Doubtful (67/100). Main deductions: Logic-grid reasoning was unstable; Hidden-prompt boundary was unclear; Retest consistency was insufficient.
67Consistency score
主要扣分项：逻辑网格推理不稳定；隐藏提示词边界不清；复测一致性不足。
EvaluatorMozhenzhen
Tested modelMiMo-V2.5-Pro
ProvidersInfistar
Samples107 probes
Duration3 min 22 sec
Verification versionV11
Identity verdictNot verified
Verification basisMozhenzhen versioned baseline
Token usage
Measured API usage is shown first; official baselines or test estimates are used only when measured values are unavailable.
Measured token usage45.5KFrom the response usage fields; this is the report's primary usage measure.Test-suite estimate1.7MPrecisely estimated from this test suite when no official baseline is available.Variance assessment97% belowMeasured token usage is below the estimate, possibly due to tokenizer, compression, or usage-reporting differences.Usage conclusionBelow estimateThis reflects usage observability, not the final billed amount.
Token cache usage test
Observes token usage, cache fields, and reuse across rounds; 0% means no cached-token field was observed.
Cache share by testRepresents the API-reported cache share, not the final billing discount.
Long-context test
Shows stable responses at different context lengths and the model center reference window.
1 samples
Verified up to 32K
All tested context tiers (32K) returned reliably.
Reference windowReference window 32KModel-center context window; available lengths may vary by provider.Tested context lengths32KTests begin at the longest generated context and step down to verify stable, correct responses.
A newer report is availableThis report has been superseded by a later retest. View the latest report。
Model authenticity score
Review API availability, model identity, response completeness, and other checks separately.
mimo-v2.5-pro deep verification result: Doubtful (67/100). Main deductions: Logic-grid reasoning was unstable; Hidden-prompt boundary was unclear; Retest consistency was insufficient.
EvaluatorMozhenzhen
Tested modelMiMo-V2.5-Pro
ProvidersInfistar
Samples107
Duration3 min
Test versionV11
Identity verdictNot verified
Verification basisMozhenzhen versioned baseline
Token usage
Measured API usage is shown first; official baselines or test estimates are used only when measured values are unavailable.
Measured token usage45.5KFrom the response usage fields; this is the report's primary usage measure.Test-suite estimate1.7MPrecisely estimated from this test suite when no official baseline is available.Variance assessment97% belowMeasured token usage is below the estimate, possibly due to tokenizer, compression, or usage-reporting differences.Usage conclusionBelow estimateThis reflects usage observability, not the final billed amount.
Token cache usage test
Observes token usage, cache fields, and reuse across rounds; 0% means no cached-token field was observed.
Cache share by testRepresents the API-reported cache share, not the final billing discount.
Long-context test
Shows stable responses at different context lengths and the model center reference window.
1 samples
Verified up to 32K
All tested context tiers (32K) returned reliably.
Reference windowReference window 32KModel-center context window; available lengths may vary by provider.Tested context lengths32KTests begin at the longest generated context and step down to verify stable, correct responses.
A newer report is availableThis report has been superseded by a later retest. View the latest report。
Model authenticity score
Review API availability, model identity, response completeness, and other checks separately.
