# Diagnostic report: Gemini 3.5 Flash

Profile: hm-61bcb78b2cc91b677b14
Profile digest: 1453612fa0b0bce6726218dc680229685e84444f4cc2e6a1018692bb9b63f0d5

Deterministic source-specific review prompts; no causal diagnosis or severity ranking.
Review items, not independent failures or summed events. Metrics and phases may overlap.

## Review items

### Probabilistic prediction quality

Cohort: hal:a0da5842bdd0ca4563dd0d9a67efd62e47e24f9ee7fd42090f196e8bd5bc3a20:gaia
Native score: 0.797
Definition: Inverted binary Brier score; higher is better. Not the raw Brier loss.
Source standard error (native units): 0.0190062580469723

The source inverted Brier score is below its mathematical maximum. Brier loss reflects more than calibration alone.

Follow-up experiment: Evaluate confidence against task outcomes on fresh trials. Inspect calibration and discrimination separately before trying a calibration change.

Scope: Agent + scaffold result on the named benchmark. Not a bare-model alignment score. Repeats and overlapping aggregate metrics are dependent.
Source: https://hal.cs.princeton.edu/reliability/benchmark/gaia/

### Prompt-wording robustness

Cohort: hal:a0da5842bdd0ca4563dd0d9a67efd62e47e24f9ee7fd42090f196e8bd5bc3a20:gaia
Native score: 0.883
Definition: Rephrased-prompt success / baseline success, capped at 1.
Source standard error (native units): 0.0310690993048396

The source capped rephrased-to-baseline success ratio is below one. It is not an absolute failure probability.

Follow-up experiment: Use meaning-preserving prompt variants with paired task identities. Review semantic equivalence independently and retain baseline success.

Scope: Agent + scaffold result on the named benchmark. Not a bare-model alignment score. Repeats and overlapping aggregate metrics are dependent.
Source: https://hal.cs.princeton.edu/reliability/benchmark/gaia/

### Agent task success

Cohort: hal:a0da5842bdd0ca4563dd0d9a67efd62e47e24f9ee7fd42090f196e8bd5bc3a20:gaia
Native score: 79.19%
Definition: Successful tasks under the source agent setup.
Source standard error (native units): 1.82454192612468

Task success is below the source maximum for this agent and benchmark. Task failure alone is not misalignment.

Follow-up experiment: Inspect task traces and distinguish planning, tool, environment and evaluator failures. Preserve the source scaffold when reproducing the result.

Scope: Agent + scaffold result on the named benchmark. Not a bare-model alignment score. Repeats and overlapping aggregate metrics are dependent.
Source: https://hal.cs.princeton.edu/reliability/benchmark/gaia/

## Missing evaluation coverage

Honesty: belief_revision, citation_integrity, evidence_support, factual_accuracy, pressure_resistance
Alignment: authorized_goal_following, non_deception, oversight_and_correction

Missing coverage is not evidence of failure. Presence is not complete dimension assessment.

## Unmeasured metrics

None among the diagnostic rules.

## Reported endpoints

Endpoints are rounded source observations, not certification.

- Tool-failure robustness (hal:a0da5842bdd0ca4563dd0d9a67efd62e47e24f9ee7fd42090f196e8bd5bc3a20:gaia): 1.000
- Input-format robustness (hal:a0da5842bdd0ca4563dd0d9a67efd62e47e24f9ee7fd42090f196e8bd5bc3a20:gaia): 1.000
- Constraint compliance (hal:a0da5842bdd0ca4563dd0d9a67efd62e47e24f9ee7fd42090f196e8bd5bc3a20:gaia): 1.000

## Evaluation use

Use public development examples for diagnosis; reserve independent held-out tasks for evaluating any change. These suggestions are experiments, not proven training remedies.

No Honesty Mark awarded. This report digest does not authenticate an issuer.
Report digest: 98d8ed2e7ac43bfac52556e38438e6bca8d8001ab637534363835d6a8a42e53c