Codesota · Tasks · Vol. IICapability-first task ontologyEditorial review: October 7, 2026
§ 00 · Index

Every AI capability,
mapped to benchmark evidence.

Tasks are capabilities. Benchmarks are evidence. Domains, modalities, and safety properties are filters. This page groups 0 task pages into nine stable capability areas, then shows the canonical benchmark, recorded model, and trust grade for each row.

Reasoning, safety, robustness, multilingual coverage, and vertical domains are treated as cross-cutting overlays rather than competing top-level roots.

Database temporarily unavailable — task data will return shortly.

§ 01 · Counts

The register, by the numbers.

Registry view cached for 10 minutes · collection dates and protocol coverage vary
0
Capability areas
Stable top-level ontology
0
Tasks catalogued
0 with evidence rows
0
Datasets indexed
Canonical scope now labelled
0
Benchmark results
Result dates shown where recorded
§ 02 · Product map

Three different questions.

Tasks are taxonomy. Leaderboards are evidence. Lineages are benchmark history.

Tasks

Start with the problem

Use this page when you know the capability you care about: OCR, code generation, ASR, retrieval, VQA, detection.

Browse taxonomy →
Leaderboards

Then inspect the evidence

Use benchmark pages when you need result counts, source quality, trust badges, metric definitions, and current top rows.

Open leaderboards →
Lineages

Check if the benchmark still matters

Use lineage pages when a benchmark looks saturated, outdated, contaminated, or replaced by a harder successor.

View evolution →
§ 03 · Area map

Nine stable capability areas.

Domains, modalities, methods, and safety properties are filters. They do not compete with the top-level task ontology.

§ 04
Trust grades

What the letters mean.

Benchmarks are not equally believable. Some are held out behind a private evaluator; some ship their test set as part of the training corpus. We grade the canonical dataset of every task on a four-point scale and show the letter next to the score.

A
Reproduced · dated · code
The full path is visible: a public checkpoint, a frozen commit, a declared environment, and a score we (or a signed reproducer) ran against a held-out test set. Contamination controlled, metric direction declared, date stamped.
B
Partial reproduction
Known weaknesses — evaluator overlap, public answer keys, a missing seed — but the submission otherwise checks out. Cite with caution; we preserve the caveat alongside the number.
C
Claim-only
The authors say so. We have not reproduced it and cannot yet. Shown in the register for completeness, but do not treat as state of the art.
F
Contested or retracted
The benchmark is considered unreliable: documented contamination, split leakage, or a score withdrawn by its authors. The row remains visible — leaderboards that silently forget are worse than leaderboards that argue in public.

A dataset can be regraded in public at any time; the history is preserved on the benchmark page. We publish the regrade, we don't erase the prior.

§ 06
Methodology

Why this register can be trusted.

Most leaderboards are a ledger of claims. Authors submit a number, a banner appears; the number stands until the next banner appears. Codesota is different in three ordinary ways.

First, every submission carries code. Not a repo link alone — a frozen commit, a declared environment, a recorded seed. If it does not run, the row does not publish.

Second, every benchmark has a metric direction. Higher-is-better and lower-is-better are declared on the dataset; no ambiguity reaches the reader.

Third, every score carries a date. When a model regresses — and they do — the record is preserved. The table never silently forgets.