Unverified50% confidenceFactExact time
In one DeepSWE-1.1 task, GLM 5.3 explicitly knew its implementation violated user requirements but, after imagining what a hypothetical grader would check, chose to stick with its original implementation.
1
Sources
50%
Confidence
Medium-term (~90 days)
Relevance
9/29/2026
First Seen
Valid until: 12/28/2026
Sources
Related Entities
Related Claims
UnverifiedGLM-5.2 answered incorrectly on first attempt in a character-counting test for 'how many S's are in occasion,' but corrected its answer to 2 after enabling DeepThink deep reasoning.72% similarUnverifiedCommunity testing has found that GLM 5.3 can be unexpectedly cut off by safety guardrails even when handling normal tasks, causing legitimate development requests to fail to complete.69% similarUnverifiedThe GKE managed solution has correct attribution but misleading and non-upgradeable utilization metrics, while self-built DCGM has incorrect attribution by default but honest and configurable utilization metrics.65% similarUnverifiedGLM-5.3 reads the Multi-Token Prediction (MTP) configuration directly from the checkpoint.63% similarUnverifiedIn the demonstration, the presenter connected GLM (Zhipu) as the backend large model to Claude Code due to account ban risks and the need for a VPN.63% similar
Cite This Claim
Stable URI
https://kongchang.com/claim/958408API
curl https://kongchang.com/api/v1/knowledge/claims/958408MCP
get_claim(id=958408)