Scores by kind of claim
Each kind of claim is scored on its own, out of 100: the share that held up, with the range it likely falls in. Fewer resolved claims give a wider range.
-
Factual claims
Statements about the present or the past, checked against the record: did they hold up?
67 61 73 -
Predictions
Statements about events outside the person's control, checked once they fell due: did they come true?
60 44 76 -
Promises
Commitments to the person's or organisation's own future action, with something to deliver: was it delivered?
Insufficient record: 0 promises resolved, 5 needed for a score.
All types combined: 66 (likely 61 to 72, high confidence), from 105 claims: 94 factual claims, 11 predictions. It mixes kinds of claim in different proportions for different people, so compare people kind by kind.
Marc Andreessen's claims
20 claims
“If you track the capabilities of cutting - edge models over time, you'll find that after 6 or 12 months, there will be a small model with the same capabilities.”
Marc Andreessen, a16z co-founder 7 January 2026 2026 Early Interview with Marc Andreessen: AI Revolution Just Started (36Kr)
Within 6 to 12 months of a frontier model's release, a small model with the same capabilities appears.
Resolved true The record shows it happened or was so.
What would count as true or false
Judged as of January 2026, as a general empirical claim about AI models. True: benchmark tracking (for example Epoch AI, Artificial Analysis, LMSYS/LMArena or published research) shows that frontier-level capability on standard benchmarks has generally been matched by much smaller models (far fewer parameters, or small or cheap tiers) within about 6–12 months of the frontier release, across several generations. Mostly true: the pattern generally holds but the typical lag is somewhat longer (up to about 18 months) or 'same capabilities' holds on most but not all major benchmarks. Mixed: it holds for some notable cases but not others, or only for narrow benchmarks. Mostly false: small models match frontier models only on selected benchmarks, or only after much longer lags, so the general claim overstates a narrow finding. False: evidence shows small models typically do not reach frontier capabilities within anything near 6–12 months.
Evidence
- Frontier AI capabilities can be run at home within a year or less Epoch AI · 15 August 2025
“We find that leading open models runnable on a single consumer GPU typically match the capabilities of frontier models after an average lag between 6-12 months.”
- Frontier AI capabilities can be run at home within a year or less Epoch AI · 15 August 2025
“We only consider models whose full set of weights can fit in GPU memory. This creates a bias away from sparsely activated models, since these models outperform dense models with the same number of active parameters but underperform those with the same number of total parameters.”
- Technical Performance Stanford HAI (AI Index 2025 Report)
“In 2022, the smallest model registering a score higher than 60% on MMLU was PaLM, with 540 billion parameters. By 2024, Microsoft’s Phi-3-mini, with just 3.8 billion parameters, achieved the same threshold.”
Reasoning
Epoch AI's independent analysis (E1) finds that leading open models small enough to run on a single consumer GPU typically match frontier-model capabilities after an average lag of 6–12 months. It compared leading open models runnable on a single consumer GPU against frontier models over time [E1]. This lines up with the claimed 6–12 month window. E2 notes a scope limit: the analysis covers only models whose full weights fit in GPU memory, which biases it away from sparsely activated models. E3 separately shows a large drop over time in the parameter count needed to reach a fixed MMLU threshold.
Cite this claim
Marc Andreessen, “Within 6 to 12 months of a frontier model's release, a small model with the same capabilities appears.” (said 7 January 2026). Verdict: resolved true. Reliability API, claim c_7812ed3031d3, method 0.1.0+c876030c. https://epistacklabs.com/claims/c_7812ed3031d3
Claims without a verdict
Is a verdict here wrong, or do you speak for Marc Andreessen? Reply on the claim's own page, with the form at its foot (how replies work). Verdicts are made automatically; how verdicts and scores are made.