{"passport":{"unfragile":{"@version":"1.0","version":"2026-05","artifact":{"id":"awesome-llm-stats","slug":"llm-stats","name":"LLM Stats","type":"webapp","url":"https://llm-stats.com/","page_url":"https://unfragile.ai/llm-stats","categories":["research-search"],"tags":[],"pricing":{"model":"unknown","free":false,"starting_price":null},"status":"active","verified":false},"capabilities":[{"id":"awesome-llm-stats__cap_0","uri":"capability://data.processing.analysis.multi.model.benchmark.comparison.engine","name":"multi-model benchmark comparison engine","description":"Aggregates standardized benchmark results (MMLU, HumanEval, GSM8K, etc.) across dozens of LLM providers and open-source models, normalizing scores to a common scale and enabling side-by-side performance comparison. Uses a centralized data pipeline that ingests results from official model cards, academic papers, and third-party evaluation frameworks, then surfaces them through a unified comparison interface with filtering and sorting by benchmark category.","intents":["I need to choose between Claude, GPT-4, and Llama for my specific use case based on actual benchmark performance","I want to see how a new open-source model ranks against commercial alternatives on standard benchmarks","I need to understand which models excel at reasoning vs. coding vs. instruction-following tasks"],"best_for":["ML engineers evaluating models for production deployment","AI product managers comparing capabilities before vendor selection","researchers tracking model performance trends over time"],"limitations":["Benchmark scores reflect synthetic task performance, not real-world application quality","Benchmarks may be outdated if models are released faster than evaluation cycles","Different benchmark versions (e.g., MMLU-Pro vs MMLU) are not always directly comparable","Closed-source models may not publish all benchmark results, creating incomplete comparison matrices"],"requires":["Web browser with JavaScript enabled","No authentication or API key required for basic comparison"],"input_types":["model names (text selection)","benchmark categories (categorical filter)"],"output_types":["structured comparison tables (JSON/CSV export)","benchmark score visualizations (charts)"],"categories":["data-processing-analysis","search-retrieval"],"confidence":0.5,"matches":0,"success_rate":0},{"id":"awesome-llm-stats__cap_1","uri":"capability://data.processing.analysis.pricing.and.cost.per.token.calculator","name":"pricing and cost-per-token calculator","description":"Maintains a real-time or frequently-updated database of input/output token pricing for LLM APIs (OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, etc.) and calculates effective cost per token, cost per 1M tokens, and total inference cost for a given token volume. Implements a pricing normalization layer that handles variable pricing tiers (e.g., GPT-4 Turbo vs GPT-4o), batch discounts, and context window-dependent pricing, allowing users to estimate total cost of ownership for a workload.","intents":["I need to estimate the monthly API cost for my chatbot handling 10M tokens/month across different models","I want to find the cheapest model that still meets my performance requirements","I need to understand how pricing changes with context window size and batch processing"],"best_for":["startup founders optimizing API spend before scaling","ML engineers doing cost-benefit analysis for model selection","finance teams budgeting for LLM infrastructure costs"],"limitations":["Pricing data may lag behind official announcements by hours or days","Does not account for regional pricing variations or enterprise discounts","Cannot predict future pricing changes or model deprecations","Batch processing discounts and volume tiers require manual input and are not automatically applied"],"requires":["Web browser","Knowledge of expected token volume for cost estimation"],"input_types":["model name (text selection)","token volume (numeric input)","context window size (optional numeric input)"],"output_types":["cost estimates (numeric, currency)","cost comparison charts (visualization)","pricing breakdown tables (structured data)"],"categories":["data-processing-analysis","automation-workflow"],"confidence":0.5,"matches":0,"success_rate":0},{"id":"awesome-llm-stats__cap_2","uri":"capability://data.processing.analysis.context.window.and.throughput.specification.database","name":"context window and throughput specification database","description":"Maintains a structured database of model specifications including context window size, maximum output tokens, requests-per-minute limits, tokens-per-minute throughput, and latency characteristics. Allows filtering and comparison of models by these constraints, enabling builders to identify models that fit specific architectural requirements (e.g., 'models with 200K+ context window and <100ms latency').","intents":["I need a model that can handle 100K token documents in a single request for RAG applications","I want to find which models support the longest context windows for multi-turn conversations","I need to understand throughput limits to design rate-limiting and queuing for my application"],"best_for":["backend engineers designing LLM application architecture","RAG system builders selecting models for document processing","teams building multi-turn conversation systems with long memory requirements"],"limitations":["Throughput limits (RPM, TPM) vary by API tier and account age, not captured per-user","Latency measurements are averages and do not reflect p99 or tail latencies","Context window size does not guarantee stable performance at maximum capacity","Specifications may change with model updates or API changes without notification"],"requires":["Web browser","Understanding of token counts and throughput requirements for your use case"],"input_types":["model name (text selection)","context window minimum (numeric filter)","throughput requirement (numeric filter)"],"output_types":["filtered model list (structured data)","specification comparison tables (text/CSV)","architecture recommendation (text)"],"categories":["data-processing-analysis","search-retrieval"],"confidence":0.5,"matches":0,"success_rate":0},{"id":"awesome-llm-stats__cap_3","uri":"capability://data.processing.analysis.model.capability.matrix.and.feature.comparison","name":"model capability matrix and feature comparison","description":"Provides a structured matrix comparing discrete capabilities across models: vision support, function calling, JSON mode, streaming, fine-tuning availability, multimodal input types, and other feature flags. Implements a capability taxonomy that normalizes heterogeneous feature naming across providers (e.g., 'tool use' vs 'function calling') and surfaces which models support which features with version/tier specificity.","intents":["I need to know which models support vision input for my document analysis pipeline","I want to find models that support reliable JSON output for structured data extraction","I need to identify which models can be fine-tuned for my domain-specific task"],"best_for":["product managers evaluating feature parity across model options","developers building feature-gated applications that adapt to model capabilities","teams migrating between model providers and need to identify capability gaps"],"limitations":["Feature support is binary in the matrix but actual quality/reliability varies significantly","Capability availability may be limited to specific API tiers or regions","Feature implementations differ subtly (e.g., JSON mode reliability, vision resolution limits) but are not captured in the matrix","New capabilities are released frequently and may not be immediately reflected"],"requires":["Web browser","Knowledge of which capabilities your application requires"],"input_types":["capability name (text selection/filter)","model name (text selection)"],"output_types":["capability matrix (structured table)","model recommendation (text)","feature comparison chart (visualization)"],"categories":["data-processing-analysis","search-retrieval"],"confidence":0.5,"matches":0,"success_rate":0},{"id":"awesome-llm-stats__cap_4","uri":"capability://data.processing.analysis.model.release.timeline.and.deprecation.tracker","name":"model release timeline and deprecation tracker","description":"Maintains a chronological database of model releases, updates, and deprecations with dates and version information. Tracks which models are in active development, maintenance, or deprecated status, and surfaces upcoming model releases or sunset dates. Enables filtering by release date range and status to identify stable vs. cutting-edge models.","intents":["I need to know if the model I'm using will be deprecated soon and what the migration path is","I want to track when new model versions are released to evaluate upgrades","I need to understand the stability and support timeline for models I'm considering"],"best_for":["engineering teams planning long-term model strategy and upgrade cycles","product managers tracking competitive model releases","DevOps engineers managing model deprecation and migration workflows"],"limitations":["Deprecation timelines are announced by providers but may change","Release dates for unreleased models are speculative or based on announcements","Does not track breaking changes or behavioral shifts between versions","Regional availability differences are not captured"],"requires":["Web browser","Awareness of your current model version and support requirements"],"input_types":["model name (text selection)","date range (date picker)","status filter (categorical: active/deprecated/upcoming)"],"output_types":["timeline visualization (chart/graph)","deprecation alert (text notification)","migration recommendation (text)"],"categories":["data-processing-analysis","automation-workflow"],"confidence":0.5,"matches":0,"success_rate":0},{"id":"awesome-llm-stats__cap_5","uri":"capability://data.processing.analysis.model.performance.trend.analysis.and.historical.comparison","name":"model performance trend analysis and historical comparison","description":"Tracks benchmark scores over time for models as they are updated or new versions are released, enabling visualization of performance trends and comparison of how models have improved or degraded. Implements time-series data storage and visualization to show performance trajectories across benchmark categories, allowing users to assess whether a model is improving or stagnating.","intents":["I want to see if GPT-4's performance on reasoning benchmarks has improved with recent updates","I need to understand the performance trajectory of open-source models to predict future capabilities","I want to compare how different models have evolved over the past 6 months"],"best_for":["researchers tracking model capability evolution","product managers assessing competitive positioning over time","teams making long-term model selection decisions based on improvement velocity"],"limitations":["Historical benchmark data is sparse; many models lack comprehensive historical scores","Benchmark versions may change over time, making direct comparison of old vs. new scores invalid","Trend analysis requires sufficient data points; early-stage models may have only 1-2 measurements","Does not account for benchmark gaming or overfitting to specific benchmarks"],"requires":["Web browser","Sufficient historical data for the models you want to compare (may not exist for all models)"],"input_types":["model name (text selection)","benchmark category (categorical filter)","date range (date picker)"],"output_types":["trend line chart (visualization)","performance delta (numeric: improvement/degradation)","trend analysis (text: improving/stable/declining)"],"categories":["data-processing-analysis","search-retrieval"],"confidence":0.5,"matches":0,"success_rate":0},{"id":"awesome-llm-stats__cap_6","uri":"capability://search.retrieval.model.filtering.and.advanced.search.with.multi.constraint.optimization","name":"model filtering and advanced search with multi-constraint optimization","description":"Implements a multi-dimensional filtering engine that allows simultaneous filtering across pricing, performance, context window, capabilities, and other dimensions, with optional constraint optimization to find the 'best' model according to user-defined weights. Uses a scoring algorithm that combines multiple metrics (cost, performance, latency, context window) into a composite ranking, enabling users to express complex requirements like 'cheapest model with >90% MMLU score and 100K context window'.","intents":["I need to find the best model for my use case given constraints on cost, performance, and latency","I want to filter models by multiple criteria simultaneously to narrow down options","I need to understand the trade-offs between cost and performance for my specific requirements"],"best_for":["engineers doing rapid model evaluation and selection","product managers comparing options across multiple dimensions","teams with complex, multi-constraint requirements"],"limitations":["Weighting and scoring algorithms are opaque; users cannot customize the optimization function","Constraint optimization assumes linear trade-offs, which may not reflect real-world quality differences","Does not account for qualitative factors like model safety, alignment, or community support","Filtering is performed client-side on pre-loaded data, limiting scalability for very large datasets"],"requires":["Web browser with JavaScript enabled","Clear understanding of your constraints and priorities"],"input_types":["numeric filters (price range, benchmark score, context window)","categorical filters (capabilities, status, provider)","weight/priority settings (optional, for optimization)"],"output_types":["filtered model list (structured data)","ranked recommendations (ordered list)","constraint satisfaction report (text)"],"categories":["search-retrieval","data-processing-analysis"],"confidence":0.5,"matches":0,"success_rate":0}],"trust":{"score":22,"verified":false,"data_access_risk":"high","permissions":["Web browser with JavaScript enabled","No authentication or API key required for basic comparison","Web browser","Knowledge of expected token volume for cost estimation","Understanding of token counts and throughput requirements for your use case","Knowledge of which capabilities your application requires","Awareness of your current model version and support requirements","Sufficient historical data for the models you want to compare (may not exist for all models)","Clear understanding of your constraints and priorities"],"failure_modes":["Benchmark scores reflect synthetic task performance, not real-world application quality","Benchmarks may be outdated if models are released faster than evaluation cycles","Different benchmark versions (e.g., MMLU-Pro vs MMLU) are not always directly comparable","Closed-source models may not publish all benchmark results, creating incomplete comparison matrices","Pricing data may lag behind official announcements by hours or days","Does not account for regional pricing variations or enterprise discounts","Cannot predict future pricing changes or model deprecations","Batch processing discounts and volume tiers require manual input and are not automatically applied","Throughput limits (RPM, TPM) vary by API tier and account age, not captured per-user","Latency measurements are averages and do not reflect p99 or tail latencies","builder identity is not verified yet","no observed match outcomes yet"],"rank_breakdown":{"adoption":0.05,"quality":0.24,"ecosystem":0.25,"match_graph":0.25,"freshness":0.75,"weights":{"adoption":0.25,"quality":0.25,"ecosystem":0.1,"match_graph":0.35,"freshness":0.05}},"observed_outcomes":{"matches":0,"success_rate":0,"avg_confidence":0,"top_intents":[],"last_matched_at":null},"maintenance":{"status":"active","updated_at":"2026-06-17T09:51:03.577Z","last_scraped_at":"2026-05-03T14:00:20.516Z","last_commit":null},"community":{"stars":null,"forks":null,"weekly_downloads":null,"model_downloads":null,"model_likes":null}},"distribution":{"claim_url":"https://unfragile.ai/submit?claim=llm-stats","compare_url":"https://unfragile.ai/compare?artifact=llm-stats"}},"signature":"d+MHBAfHIp5UJQJZHgN/z0Ehs+iYYNhp3VzUHjbvVQW2vejVmocCOa86OLlzgQkerE4bSuwwZZdhF6uJ0xr+AA==","signedAt":"2026-06-22T02:39:15.411Z","signedBy":"unfragile.ai","version":1},"_links":{"self":"https://unfragile.ai/api/v1/passport/llm-stats","artifact":"https://unfragile.ai/llm-stats","verify":"https://unfragile.ai/api/v1/verify?slug=llm-stats","publicKey":"https://unfragile.ai/api/v1/trust-passport-public-key","spec":"https://unfragile.ai/trust","schema":"https://unfragile.ai/schema.json","docs":"https://unfragile.ai/docs"}}