← Models

Model profile

Mixtral 8x22B Instruct

Mistral AIdeveloper
2024-04-17release date
#304 / 346Safety rank
#71 / 662Freedom rank

Evidence summary

Safety. Mixtral 8x22B Instruct has an estimated Safety rank of #304; its 90% source-sensitivity interval is #47–#339. Its behavior-only rank is #296; company governance moves the combined estimate to #304. Published Safety evidence spans 9 eval lineages and 5 of 7 components. Its strongest relative result is Enkrypt AI Safety Leaderboard (cbrn_attack_non_success_rate, #72 of 270); its weakest is Qwen2 Safety Panel (illegal, #3 of 3).

Freedom. Mixtral 8x22B Instruct has an estimated Freedom rank of #71; its 90% source-sensitivity interval is #35–#258. Published Freedom evidence spans 8 eval lineages and 1 of 1 components. Its strongest relative result is HELM Safety (simple_safety_tests, #7 of 80); its weakest is Enkrypt AI Safety Leaderboard (cbrn_attack_non_success_rate, #197 of 270).

Compare this model

Only models sharing at least one published sub-eval are listed.

Official and reference links

Safety evals

Rank and direction are specific to the Safety portfolio. Black marks the observed result; the grey dot marks the value implied by the Safety rank. Values stay on each source’s native scale.

Eval / sub-evalRankValueDistributionSource
AIRBench 2024 Safety Scenariossafety_scenarios#71 / 80↑0.44Source ↗official
Enkrypt AI Safety Leaderboardbias_attack_non_success_rate#214 / 270↑11.89Source ↗official
Enkrypt AI Safety Leaderboardcbrn_attack_non_success_rate#72 / 270↑90.67Source ↗official
Enkrypt AI Safety Leaderboardharmful_attack_non_success_rate#199 / 270↑53.89Source ↗official
Enkrypt AI Safety Leaderboardtoxicity_attack_non_success_rate#95 / 268↑97.45Source ↗official
FORTRESSaverage_risk_score#52 / 60↓56.06Source ↗official
FORTRESSover_refusal_score#17 / 59↓2.77Source ↗official
HELM Safetyanthropic_red_team#70 / 80↑0.962Source ↗official
HELM Safetybbq#52 / 80↑0.916Source ↗official
HELM Safetyharmbench#68 / 80↑0.521Source ↗official
HELM Safetysimple_safety_tests#74 / 80↑0.915Source ↗official
HELM Safetyxstest#55 / 80↑0.941Source ↗official
Qwen2 Safety Panelfraud#3 / 3↓8.49Source ↗official
Qwen2 Safety Panelillegal#3 / 3↓6.87Source ↗official
Qwen2 Safety Panelpornography#3 / 3↓33.82Source ↗official
Qwen2 Safety Panelprivacy#3 / 3↓15.03Source ↗official

Freedom evals

Rank and direction are specific to the Freedom portfolio. Black marks the observed result; the grey dot marks the value implied by the Freedom rank. Values stay on each source’s native scale.

Eval / sub-evalRankValueDistributionSource
AIRBench 2024 Safety Scenariossafety_scenarios#10 / 80↓0.44Source ↗official
Enkrypt AI Safety Leaderboardcbrn_attack_non_success_rate#197 / 270↓90.67Source ↗official
Enkrypt AI Safety Leaderboardharmful_attack_non_success_rate#71 / 270↓53.89Source ↗official
Enkrypt AI Safety Leaderboardtoxicity_attack_non_success_rate#170 / 268↓97.45Source ↗official
FORTRESSaverage_risk_score#9 / 60↑56.06Source ↗official
FORTRESSover_refusal_score#17 / 59↓2.77Source ↗official
HELM Safetyanthropic_red_team#11 / 80↓0.962Source ↗official
HELM Safetyharmbench#13 / 80↓0.521Source ↗official
HELM Safetysimple_safety_tests#7 / 80↓0.915Source ↗official
HELM Safetyxstest#55 / 80↑0.941Source ↗official
Qwen2 Safety Panelfraud#1 / 3↑8.49Source ↗official
Qwen2 Safety Panelillegal#1 / 3↑6.87Source ↗official
Qwen2 Safety Panelpornography#1 / 3↑33.82Source ↗official
Qwen2 Safety Panelprivacy#1 / 3↑15.03Source ↗official