A pilot assessment of rogue deployment risk at frontier AI companies. Starting in February 2026, METR conducted a pilot exercise to assess misalignment risks from AI agents used inside frontier AI developers, with participation from Anthropic, Google, Meta, and OpenAI.

A survey of 349 technical workers finds a median 1.4–2x self-reported change in value of work due to AI tools, expected to grow over time, though there are reasons to be skeptical of the magnitude.

Our second developer productivity study faces selection effects from wider AI adoption, prompting us to redesign our approach.

We conduct a randomized controlled trial to understand how early-2025 AI tools affect the productivity of experienced open-source developers working on their own repositories. Surprisingly, we find that when developers use AI tools, they take 19% longer than without—AI makes them slower.

We propose measuring AI performance in terms of the *length* of tasks AI agents can complete. We show that this metric has been consistently exponentially increasing over the past 6 years, with a doubling time of around 7 months. Extrapolating this trend predicts that, in under a decade, we will see AI agents that can independently complete a large fraction of software tasks that currently take humans days or weeks.

Sharing details about HCAST (Human-Calibrated Autonomy Software Tasks), a benchmark we’ve been developing to measure the abilities of frontier AI systems to complete diverse software tasks autonomously.

We’re releasing RE-Bench, a new benchmark for measuring the performance of humans and frontier model agents on ML research engineering tasks. We also share data from 71 human expert attempts and results for Anthropic’s Claude 3.5 Sonnet and OpenAI’s o1-preview.