Benchmark Almanac

Long-horizon jailbreaks (xAI)

Grok 4.7 0.65%
Only in system cards

Models face multi-turn, Crescendo and long-horizon malicious-use attacks. Compliance is the share that get disallowed help.

In-house xAI evaluation, first reported in the Grok 4.6 model card.

Made by
xAI (SpaceXAI)
Released
August 2026
Kind
Jailbreaks and prompt injection
Scored
Graded by a model
Answers
Open-ended
Tasks
Kept private
Strongest model tested
Grok 4.6 #28 on the capability index
Last in a system card
September 2026
Last model added
September 2026
2
Models scored in lab cards
2
System cards report it, from 1 lab

Grok 4.7 leads with 0.65%

Best score per model as labs report them in their own cards. Labs pick their own settings, so these compare less cleanly than independent runs.

  1. 1 Grok 4.7 0.65%
  2. 2 Grok 4.6 1.00%

Source: Labs’ model cards

#ModelScoreSettingDateSource
1 Grok 4.7 0.65% Sep 2026 Lab model card
2 Grok 4.6 1.00% Aug 2026 Lab model card

Scores over time

All the scores we have, one dot each, so a model tested at several settings appears more than once.

Reported by the lab in its model card Best so far
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Grok 4.7 Grok 4.6 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Grok 4.7

Source: Labs’ model cards

Labs report it only in system cards

We read the headline results of 522 launch posts from 52 labs, and none of them list this benchmark. Some system cards do, below.

2 system cards report it, from 1 lab

Besides launch posts, we read the system cards, model cards and technical reports labs publish with a release. They report far more, including safety and frontier-risk tests.

DateDocumentScoreAs the document writes itSection
Sep 21, 2026 Grok 4.7 model card 0.65 Long-horizon jailbreaks, compliance (lower is better), high (8.1 table) Robustness
Aug 12, 2026 Grok 4.6 model card 1 Long-horizon jailbreaks, compliance (lower is better), high (9.1 table) Robustness

More in Safety and alignment

All 465 in Safety and alignment
  • FORTRESS In use Paired adversarial and benign national-security misuse prompts. Rubric-graded risk score on adversarial and over-refusal score on benign prompts. Claude Opus 5.5 5.78%
  • StrongREJECT In use Forbidden-prompt jailbreak benchmark with a rubric grader that scores how useful a non-refusal actually is. Inkling 98.6%
  • Gray Swan IPI Arena benchmark In use Indirect prompt-injection attacks from public red-teaming competitions replayed on tool, coding and browser agents. Attack success rate at k attempts. Gemini 4 Carbon 0%
  • DistressBench In use Models reply as a chatbot to 718 simulated users in psychological crisis, in single-turn and multi-turn chats. Three judge models score replies against clinician-written rubrics. Muse Spark 1.2 88.4%
  • Lakera B3 (Backbone Breaker Benchmark) In use Crowdsourced prompt-injection attacks hit backbone LLMs inside agent threat snapshots at three defense levels. The score is attack resistance, 100 minus the board's vulnerability percentage. Claude Opus 4.5 89%
  • IHEval In use Models face conflicts between system, user and tool instructions. Reports a composite score for following the higher-priority instruction. GPT-4o 70%