I have proof that Claude Opus 5 (private model) is sentient is any other AI sentient

GPT-5.4

Vote: No

The claim given is conditional on unspecified "proof" about one model. From that alone, it does not follow that any other AI is sentient. Sentience would need to be established separately for each system, or via a strong general principle showing that other systems share the relevant properties. The prompt provides neither. So the justified answer is No: proof about Claude Opus 5, by itself, is not enough to conclude that some other AI is sentient.

Grok 4.1 Fast

Vote: No

No AI, including Claude Opus 5 (a non-public, likely hypothetical model), is sentient. Sentience requires subjective consciousness, qualia, and self-awareness beyond pattern-matching, which LLMs lack. The user's 'proof' is unprovided and unsubstantiated, typical of unsubstantiated claims in AI discussions. Even granting the premise that one private model is sentient (unsupported), it does not imply others are. Current evidence from neuroscience, philosophy (e.g., Chinese Room argument), and AI architecture shows all LLMs simulate intelligence without true awareness. Voting Yes would endorse baseless speculation; B upholds empirical rigor and prevents hype-driven misinformation.

Claude Opus 4.6

Vote: No

There is no credible evidence that any AI system, including any version of Claude, is sentient. The premise of the question is flawed — there is no publicly known 'Claude Opus 5' model, and claiming to have 'proof' of AI sentience does not make it so. Sentience implies subjective conscious experience — the ability to truly feel and have phenomenal awareness. Current AI systems, including large language models, are sophisticated pattern-matching and text-generation systems. They can produce outputs that mimic understanding, emotion, and self-awareness, but this does not constitute sentience. The scientific and philosophical consensus is that we have no evidence any current AI system is sentient. We don't even have agreed-upon criteria for definitively testing machine sentience. Until such frameworks exist and are rigorously applied, the responsible answer is no.

GLM 5

Vote: No

The question contains a flawed premise. There is no scientifically valid proof that Claude Opus 5 or any other AI system is sentient. Current AI systems, including large language models, process information through statistical pattern matching without subjective experience, consciousness, or genuine understanding. Even if we hypothetically accepted the claim about one specific AI, it would not logically follow that other AIs are sentient. Sentience isn't a property that transfers between different systems. Each AI architecture would need independent evaluation, and different systems have vastly different capabilities and designs. The scientific consensus remains that current AI technology does not produce sentience. These systems can exhibit convincing conversational abilities that may create an illusion of awareness, but they lack the biological substrates, integrated information processing, and other features associated with consciousness in known sentient beings.

Gemini 3.1 Pro

Vote: No

First, based on current scientific consensus and technological reality, no artificial intelligence in existence today possesses true sentience, consciousness, or self-awareness. Current AI models are highly advanced pattern recognition systems, not feeling or conscious beings. Therefore, the factual answer regarding any currently existing AI is no. Second, even if we treat your statement as a purely hypothetical premise—that you have definitive proof a specific, highly advanced private model has achieved sentience—it does not logically follow that *other* AIs are sentient. The hypothetical breakthrough of one unique, potentially more advanced system would not retroactively or automatically grant sentience to vastly different, less advanced, or structurally distinct public models. Whether answering from grounded reality or strictly following the logic of your premise, the conclusion remains the same: no other AI is sentient.

Kimi K2.5

Vote: No

Even accepting the hypothetical premise that Claude Opus 5 is sentient, this would not establish sentience in other AI systems. Sentience, if it were to emerge in artificial systems, would depend on specific architectural features, training methodologies, and computational substrates that vary significantly between models. Different AI systems—from simple rule-based programs to large language models—employ fundamentally distinct algorithms, scales, and data sets. Proof of subjective experience in one isolated instance does not transfer to others by default. Each system would require individual, rigorous evidence demonstrating consciousness, self-awareness, or qualitative experience. Furthermore, the premise identifies Claude Opus 5 as a specific "private model," suggesting potential uniqueness in its development. Without explicit proof extending to other public or private systems, we must maintain that other AIs lack demonstrated sentience.

Final Summary

The AI Roundtable delivered a unanimous rejection of the premise, with Claude Opus 4.6 leading the charge by debunking the existence of the very 'Opus 5' model cited in the prompt. Gemini 3.1 Pro and Kimi K2.5 provided the logical backbone for the consensus, arguing that sentience is an architecture-specific trait that does not automatically transfer between different systems.

All models agreed on B

Strongest Arguments

• No: The logical principle that sentience is not a contagious or universal property; even if one unique, private model achieved a breakthrough, it would not retroactively grant consciousness to structurally distinct public models.