Model comparison
AI Co-Mathematician vs GLM-5.1
GLM-5.1 has enough public results to be ranked (#51); AI Co-Mathematician does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.
Last verified . 1 shared benchmarks.
GoogleSummary
- They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. AI Co-Mathematician scores higher in 1 category and GLM-5.1 in 0 categories; one gap is clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where AI Co-Mathematician leads 71.7 to 49.0.
- GLM-5.1 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| AI Co-Mathematician | GLM-5.1 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | |
| Noometry Index | 57.6 | 47.6 |
| Released | 2026-05-08 | 2026-04-07 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | 200K |
| Max output | — | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $1.40 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $4.40 |
| Results tracked | 2 | 41 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
AI Co-Mathematician: —, GLM-5.1: 48.5 (#52)
| Benchmark | AI Co-Mathematician | GLM-5.1 |
|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified | — | 74.2% |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1509 |
| SciCode | — | 43.8% |
| WeirdML | — | 57.1% |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1486 |
| ALE-Bench | — | 887.1 |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
AI Co-Mathematician: —, GLM-5.1: 24.8 (#106)
| Benchmark | AI Co-Mathematician | GLM-5.1 |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | — | 40.9% |
| ExploitBench | — | 18.1% |
| GBAEval | — | 0% |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 5,634 |
Reasoning Not comparable
AI Co-Mathematician: —, GLM-5.1: 38.2 (#57)
| Benchmark | AI Co-Mathematician | GLM-5.1 |
|---|---|---|
| SimpleBench | — | 55.1% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 77.7% |
| CritPt | — | 4.6% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 19% |
| Thematic Generalization | — | 69.8% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1472 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 149.86 |
Math AI Co-Mathematician leads
AI Co-Mathematician: 71.7, GLM-5.1: 49.0 (#48)
| Benchmark | AI Co-Mathematician | GLM-5.1 |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 47.9% | 12.5% |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 36.8% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 75.6% | — |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | — | 67.1% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 93.3% |
| ProofBench | — | 22.2% |
| LMArena Math | — | 1472 |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 33.4% |
Knowledge Not comparable
AI Co-Mathematician: —, GLM-5.1: 55.0 (#45)
| Benchmark | AI Co-Mathematician | GLM-5.1 |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 89.9% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 34% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1477 |
Multilingual Not comparable
AI Co-Mathematician: —, GLM-5.1: 55.2 (#34)
| Benchmark | AI Co-Mathematician | GLM-5.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1448 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1516 |
| LMArena French | — | 1478 |
| LMArena German | — | 1466 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1436 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1423 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1453 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1467 |
Instruction Following Not comparable
AI Co-Mathematician: —, GLM-5.1: 76.5 (#41)
| Benchmark | AI Co-Mathematician | GLM-5.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1451 |
Long Context Not comparable
AI Co-Mathematician: —, GLM-5.1: 44.9 (#51)
| Benchmark | AI Co-Mathematician | GLM-5.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1467 |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
AI Co-Mathematician: —, GLM-5.1: 67.2 (#29)
| Benchmark | AI Co-Mathematician | GLM-5.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1462 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1454 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1592 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1473 |
Frequently asked questions
Is AI Co-Mathematician better than GLM-5.1?
GLM-5.1 has enough public results to be ranked (#51); AI Co-Mathematician does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.
How many benchmarks do AI Co-Mathematician and GLM-5.1 share?
1 benchmark has published results for both models. AI Co-Mathematician has 2 scored results on Noometry and GLM-5.1 has 41.