Composio reportedly tested DeepSeek V4 Flash, GLM 5.2, and Kimi K3 on difficult, long-running agent tasks spanning multiple applications, claiming that DeepSeek performed best. The supplied search snippets do not expose the test methodology, deterministic controls, scores, or any actual independent reruns; they also conflict on the broader ranking, with some sources placing Kimi K3 ahead in raw intelligence and one describing DeepSeek Flash as below GLM 5.2 and Kimi K3. The claim should therefore be treated as a harness-specific result awaiting reproducible evaluation, not an established model ranking.
2026-08-05T04:24:02Z
The nominal attachment contains no identifiable methodology release or controlled DeepSeek/GLM/Kimi workflow rerun after repeated dormant checks. The closed ranking has exhausted its attention window and should be reopened only if reproducible evaluation evidence appears.
2026-08-05T03:27:58Z
The nominal evidence trigger adds no identifiable rerun, methodology disclosure, or controlled DeepSeek/GLM/Kimi comparison. Existing evidence supports deployment viability and strong harness sensitivity, but the claimed workflow ranking remains uncorroborated and dormant.
2026-08-05T02:29:59Z
No identifiable new evidence adds a methodology release or controlled DeepSeek/GLM/Kimi workflow rerun. Existing reports continue to show configuration and harness sensitivity rather than validate Composio’s ranking, so the case remains dormant pending direct reproducibility evidence.
2026-08-05T01:22:20Z
The CUDA-dependent looping fix adds evidence that deployment configuration can materially affect long-running reliability, strengthening the need for disclosed controls. It does not rerun Composio’s workflows or corroborate the DeepSeek/GLM/Kimi ranking.
2026-08-05T01:21:11Z
evidence attached: reddit.post.1vfshny — A firsthand report supports the open hypothesis that DeepSeek V4 Flash may be useful for long-running coding-agent workflows, though it is not independent benchmarking.
2026-08-05T00:27:08Z
The nominal attachment adds no direct rerun, methodology disclosure, or controlled DeepSeek/GLM/Kimi comparison beyond already-priced evidence. The independent benchmarks establish harness sensitivity, not Composio’s ranking, so engagement-only updates should no longer trigger frequent review.
2026-08-04T23:29:31Z
The nominal attachment adds no methodology release, controlled DeepSeek/GLM/Kimi workflow rerun, or other evidence beyond the already-priced harness-sensitive benchmarks. The case remains dormant; only direct reproducibility evidence would change its meaning.
2026-08-04T22:28:12Z
The nominal attachment adds no independent workflow rerun, harness disclosure, or controlled DeepSeek/GLM/Kimi comparison; existing benchmarks only reinforce task and configuration sensitivity. Engagement-only triggers are exhausted, so the case should remain dormant until direct reproducibility evidence appears.
2026-08-04T21:24:08Z
The nominal evidence trigger adds nothing beyond already-priced deployment and agent-benchmark results, which demonstrate harness sensitivity but do not reproduce Composio’s DeepSeek/GLM/Kimi workflow comparison. Keep the case dormant until the methodology or a controlled independent rerun appears.
2026-08-04T20:24:54Z
No new direct rerun, methodology disclosure, or controlled DeepSeek/GLM/Kimi comparison is present; the trigger is repetitive activity around already-priced evidence. The case remains dormant and should revive only if reproducible workflow evidence appears.
2026-08-04T19:28:02Z
The nominal trigger adds no new evidence beyond the already-priced agent benchmarks, which show harness sensitivity but do not rerun Composio’s controlled multi-application comparison. The case is now dormant; only a methodology release or equivalent DeepSeek/GLM/Kimi workflow rerun would change its meaning.
2026-08-04T18:30:57Z
A second independent agent-oriented benchmark reinforces that DeepSeek V4 Flash’s apparent strength is sensitive to harness, task mix, and reasoning configuration rather than establishing a general agentic lead. It still does not rerun Composio’s multi-application workflows or compare DeepSeek directly with GLM 5.2 and Kimi K3 under equivalent controls.
2026-08-04T18:21:33Z
evidence attached: reddit.post.1vfhqkm — This is an independent agentic-coding benchmark directly testing DeepSeek V4 Flash against competing models.
2026-08-04T17:27:23Z
The first independent agent-oriented ranking cuts against generalizing Composio’s claimed DeepSeek lead, but differing tasks and an apparently non-max reasoning configuration prevent a clean comparison. This creates a genuine conflicting signal, not a reproducible rerun of the deterministic multi-application workflow claim.
2026-08-04T17:22:09Z
evidence attached: reddit.post.1vff300 — An independent Agent Arena result materially contextualizes DeepSeek V4 Flash’s agentic capability, though its ranking is below competing models.
2026-08-04T16:28:50Z
No direct workflow rerun, harness disclosure, or cross-model comparison has appeared; the latest activity remains adjacent deployment and narrow-task evidence rather than validation of Composio’s ranking. The case is dormant until reproducible evaluation evidence emerges.
2026-08-04T15:31:56Z
The independent SQL result adds narrow evidence that even a 2-bit DeepSeek V4 Flash quant can perform strongly on a coding-adjacent task, but it neither reruns Composio’s multi-application workflows nor compares the three models under the claimed harness. The central ranking remains closed and uncorroborated; only direct reproducibility evidence should revive attention.
2026-08-04T15:21:52Z
evidence attached: reddit.post.1vfctwf — Independent local benchmark evidence supports DeepSeek V4 Flash’s strong reasoning and coding-adjacent task performance.
2026-08-04T14:23:26Z
The nominal attachment adds no independent workflow rerun, harness disclosure, or cross-model evaluation evidence; deployment practicality remains separate from validating Composio’s ranking. Keep the case dormant and revive it only for reproducible evaluation evidence.
2026-08-04T13:24:05Z
The latest trigger adds no direct workflow rerun, harness disclosure, or independent ranking evidence; deployment and quantization activity remains adjacent practicality evidence only. Repetitive engagement is exhausted, so the case should stay dormant until reproducibility evidence appears.
2026-08-04T12:26:40Z
The GGUF release and reasoning-level template improve reproducibility of local deployment, but still provide no independent workflow rerun or disclosure of Composio’s harness. The claimed cross-model ranking remains closed and uncorroborated; only direct evaluation evidence should revive attention.
2026-08-04T12:21:35Z
evidence attached: reddit.post.1vf8944 — The updated GGUF and reasoning-level template materially support the same DeepSeek V4 Flash local-model episode.
2026-08-04T11:26:37Z
No independent workflow rerun, methodology release, or configuration disclosure has appeared; the deployment reports establish practical inference viability but do not validate Composio’s ranking. The latest trigger adds no new meaning, so the case should remain dormant pending reproducibility evidence.
2026-08-04T10:23:19Z
Independent deployment reports now strengthen DeepSeek V4 Flash’s practical long-context inference viability, but they do not test Composio’s multi-application workflows or corroborate its model ranking. The central claim remains closed and harness-specific pending methodology disclosure or an independent rerun.
2026-08-04T10:21:16Z
evidence attached: hn.story.49166386 — Independent evidence that DeepSeek V4 Flash runs on a single MI300X materially informs the model's practical local-inference and agent-workflow viability.
2026-08-04T10:21:16Z
evidence attached: reddit.post.1vf64mz — This independent infrastructure report materially contextualizes DeepSeek V4 Flash’s long-context throughput and deployment viability.
2026-08-04T09:24:55Z
The nominal update again adds no independent workflow rerun, methodology disclosure, or configuration release. The case remains an uncorroborated harness-specific ranking, and repeated engagement-only triggers are now fully exhausted as evidence.
2026-08-04T08:22:12Z
The nominal evidence update still provides no independent workflow rerun, methodology disclosure, or configuration release; the ranking remains a closed, harness-specific claim. Repetitive engagement is exhausted and should not revive attention absent reproducibility evidence.
2026-08-04T07:22:47Z
The new attachment contains no independent rerun, methodology release, or configuration disclosure, so the ranking remains a closed, harness-specific claim. Routine engagement is exhausted as a signal; only reproducibility evidence should revive the case.
2026-08-04T06:22:33Z
The nominal attachment supplies no independent workflow rerun, methodology release, or configuration disclosure; the ranking remains an uncorroborated, harness-specific claim. Repeated engagement updates are exhausted and should not revive attention without reproducibility evidence.
2026-08-04T05:21:58Z
The nominal evidence attachment adds neither an independent workflow rerun nor methodology/configuration disclosure; the ranking remains a closed, harness-specific claim. Further engagement is repetitive, so only reproducibility evidence should revive attention.
2026-08-04T04:30:52Z
The apparent evidence update adds no independent rerun, methodology disclosure, or new implementation; the ranking remains a closed, harness-specific claim. Further unchanged engagement is repetitive and does not justify frequent review.
2026-08-04T03:22:11Z
The reobservation adds no independent workflow rerun, methodology disclosure, or implementation; it is further repetitive amplification of a closed, harness-specific ranking. Keep the case open but move to a slower cadence pending reproducible evidence.
2026-08-04T02:26:44Z
No substantive new evidence accompanies the reobservation: the agent-workflow ranking remains closed and uncorroborated, while the hardware result only establishes practical inference context. Repetitive engagement no longer warrants hourly review.
2026-08-04T01:21:52Z
No independent workflow rerun, methodology release, or configuration disclosure has emerged; the added activity remains repetitive amplification and practicality context rather than validation of Composio’s ranking.
2026-08-04T00:24:48Z
The latest reobservation adds no independent workflow rerun, methodology release, or consequential participant; attention remains repetitive amplification of an unverifiable harness-specific ranking.
2026-08-03T23:22:53Z
The attached evidence adds no independent workflow rerun or methodology disclosure, so activity remains repetitive amplification around practicality and reproducibility rather than validation of the claimed ranking.
2026-08-03T22:23:51Z
No independent workflow rerun, methodology release, or configuration disclosure has appeared; the new activity only amplifies practicality and reproducibility questions already captured. The claimed model ranking remains a closed, harness-specific result.
2026-08-03T21:22:26Z
Commodity-hardware inference results improve the practicality context for DeepSeek V4 Flash but do not corroborate its agent-workflow ranking; renewed requests for the eval repository and configuration reinforce that the central claim remains closed and unrereun.
2026-08-03T21:21:34Z
evidence attached: reddit.post.1veow4b — Independent local-inference results materially contextualize whether the full DeepSeek V4 Flash checkpoint is practically usable on commodity multi-GPU hardware, though they do not test agent workflows directly.
2026-08-03T20:26:44Z
grounded: known/medium — Scott already holds the controlling position in Evaluation-Driven Development and Capability Audit: harness-specific model rankings require repeatable, represen
2026-08-03T20:22:17Z
case created — Composio reports a concrete but currently uncorroborated head-to-head evaluation whose deterministic workflow claims are independently testable.