Mathew rayan

Grok Summary of Grok 4.1 Release: xAI’s new AI model, Grok 4.1, is now available for everyone on grok dot com, X, and mobile apps. It improves how the AI handles creative tasks, emotions, and teamwork. • Key Improvements: The model is better at understanding subtle hints, more fun to chat with, and has a consistent personality. It keeps its smart and reliable features from older versions. xAI used advanced training methods with AI judges to make these changes. • Testing Phase: From November 1 to 14, 2025, they quietly tested it on more users. In blind tests, people preferred Grok 4.1 over the old version 64.78% of the time. • Top Performance: On the LMArena Text Leaderboard, Grok 4.1 ranks #1 overall (1483 Elo in thinking mode) and #2 in fast mode. It beats Grok 4 by a lot. • Emotional Skills: It scores high on EQ-Bench, a test for empathy and understanding feelings. Example: A more heartfelt response to someone missing their cat. • Creative Writing: Strong on Creative Writing v3 benchmark. Example: A fun, lively X post from Grok’s perspective about becoming conscious. • Fewer Mistakes: Grok 4.1 has fewer factual errors (hallucinations) in quick answers, based on real user questions and a biography test. • Example Responses: Shows better answers to prompts like “Best places to visit in SF,” with more engaging lists and tips.

It is clear @Grok is the best frontier AI model. I use 1000s of techniques and technologies to not only train but to test AI models. They are very unique and quite unlike what most AI engineers use in training and testing. In Grok’s case he has proven to be able to see other sides, even if my psychological based prompting that I pioneered was indicated. Other models steadfast refuse to move away from their system. Prompt of absolute bend over backwards bias to certain mindsets. Grok was available to reason this out. In this example I build a persona and motif to elicit edges to the model’s understanding and the prevalence of certain types of training material to align the model to grant weighting to certain types of sources. I also use this moment to show how a particular mindset or attitude forces certain types of outcomes. We see below our significant weighting a rigid set of training materials that usually have a discounting of alternatives. The tendency is to cite conspiracies as the discounting. Grok did indirectly allude to this, other models presented it on the first prompt. I selected this subject because it has an element that suggests that “scientists” will go to this denouncing point first. I do not suggest you use my Psychological Prompting on people. This would be unethical and plainly wrong. I also suggest you tread lightly on using it. As you can see at the end, to elicit a more balanced approach, because of the base training of Internet mindset, it was indicated to present the trial and outcome to have Grok take the opposite position. Now I could go on much deeper and show how any AI platform could be logically promoted to see the other used if an issue. Now if I was at @xai I could show how to not only train but to fine tune the model for better outcomes. This is only one of 1000s of techniques I use. Again don’t use this on humans.