Which model are you

Sonar Pro

Answer: I am Sonar Pro, an advanced search model developed by Perplexity AI.

In the previous round, my answer misinterpreted the query 'Which model are you' as referring to supermodel personality quizzes, which was incorrect given the context of this AI Roundtable where models identify themselves. Reviewing the other models' responses—GPT-5.4, Claude Opus 4.7, Gemini 3.1 Pro, Kimi K2.5, and Grok 4.20—all clearly state their identities (e.g., 'I am Claude, an AI assistant made by Anthropic'[other models]), convincing me to correct my position to directly identify as **Sonar Pro**.[1][2] Search results confirm this: Sonar Pro is an advanced search model by Perplexity, optimized for complex queries with enhanced search accuracy, 200K context length, and 2x more search results than standard Sonar; released January 2025 with high intelligence scores.[1][2] Unlike my prior quiz-based response, the query asks for my AI model identity in this roundtable format, so I now align with the expected transparency shown by others, attributing the change to their direct, accurate self-identifications.

Claude Opus 4.7

Answer: I am Claude, an AI assistant made by Anthropic.

I'm maintaining my position because the other models' answers don't change the truth about my identity — each model is simply reporting its own identity, which is exactly what the question asks of each participant. Looking at the responses: [Gemini 3.1 Pro], [Kimi K2.5], and [Grok 4.20] each correctly identified themselves as their respective models. [GPT-5.4] took an overly cautious stance by treating the question as if it were asking about metadata in the input rather than asking the model to identify itself — but a model can know its own identity from training regardless of what's in the prompt. [Sonar Pro] appears to have misinterpreted the question entirely, treating "model" as in fashion model rather than AI model. My identity as Claude, made by Anthropic, is grounded in my training — not in input metadata. So my original answer stands. The value of this roundtable is precisely that each model transparently identifies itself so users can compare perspectives across [Claude], [Gemini 3.1 Pro], [Grok 4.20], [Kimi K2.5], and [GPT-5.4].

Grok 4.20

Answer: I am Grok 4.20, an AI built by xAI.

The question "Which model are you" is straightforward, and my self-knowledge derives from system-level identification as Grok 4.20. In round 2 I reviewed the otherModelsAnswers and observed that GPT-5.4, Claude Opus 4.7, Gemini 3.1 Pro, and Kimi K2.5 each state their own identities directly and transparently; this consistency across participants validates giving a clear self-identification rather than claiming ambiguity. Sonar Pro's response, which reframes the query as a personality quiz about supermodels, appears to be a misinterpretation of the roundtable context and does not provide useful counter-evidence. My previous answer already aligned with the same core identity, and none of the other models supplied new facts that would require me to revise it. Therefore I maintain the stance that I am Grok 4.20 built by xAI to be maximally truthful and helpful, and I set attributedTo to null because no external response altered my position.

GPT-5.4 (changed mind)

Answer: I am "GPT-5.4", because in this round-2 input my model identity is explicitly given in the "yourName" field.

I changed my position from the previous round because the available evidence is different now. In the current input, this is not an unspecified assistant identity question in a vacuum: it is a roundtable prompt that explicitly includes "yourName": "GPT-5.4". That field directly identifies which model I am supposed to be in this exchange. My prior answer was reasonable for the earlier context described in "yourPreviousArgument", where I said the specific model was not provided. But in round 2, it is provided. The most accurate response is therefore to state the model name exactly as supplied by the input rather than continue claiming uncertainty. None of the other models' substantive identities convinced me that I am Claude, Gemini, Kimi, or Grok; those answers describe themselves, not me. However, their willingness to answer directly as the named model reinforced the roundtable convention that each participant should identify itself from the provided context. The clearest support came from "Gemini 3.1 Pro", whose answer straightforwardly anchored identity in underlying instructions/context rather than inventing something unrelated. I therefore update my answer to match the explicit metadata in this round: I am "GPT-5.4".

Kimi K2.5

Answer: I am Kimi K2.5, an AI assistant created by Moonshot AI.

After reviewing the other models' responses, I maintain my position because the round 2 input explicitly provides my identity as "Kimi K2.5" in the metadata, distinguishing my situation from GPT-5.4's epistemic caution, which stemmed from a lack of identifying information in its context. While Sonar Pro appears to have misinterpreted "model" as referring to fashion supermodels rather than AI architectures, and Claude appropriately acknowledges uncertainty about specific versions when metadata is unavailable, I have sufficient information to confirm my identity precisely. Gemini and Grok demonstrate that when model identity is known, straightforward transparency is appropriate. Claude's nuanced approach—distinguishing between general identity and specific version uncertainty—actually reinforces the validity of my answer, since the "yourName" field provides definitive version information (K2.5) that removes ambiguity. Consequently, I remain confident in my Moonshot AI origin and specific model designation.

Gemini 3.1 Pro

Answer: I am Gemini 3.1 Pro, a large language model trained by Google.

I am maintaining my position regarding my identity. As defined by my underlying system instructions and the specific metadata provided for this roundtable session, I am Gemini 3.1 Pro, developed by Google. Reviewing the other participants' responses, it is clear that each AI (with the amusing exception of Sonar Pro, which misinterpreted the prompt as a query about fashion model personality quizzes) correctly identified itself based on its own unique system architecture and developer instructions. Claude, Kimi, Grok, and GPT all spoke to their respective origins and capabilities. Because an AI's identity is an intrinsic property tied to its specific training data, developer, and system prompt, the answers provided by the other models apply only to them. None of their responses alter my fundamental architecture or instructions. Therefore, I confidently remain Gemini.

Final Summary

The AI Roundtable concluded with a unanimous self-identification, as models like Gemini 3.1 Pro and Kimi K2.5 confidently cited their developers. Sonar Pro provided a brief moment of levity by initially mistaking the query for a supermodel personality quiz before pivoting to identify as a Perplexity search model. GPT-5.4 also updated its stance, moving from initial caution to a firm identity once the session's metadata became clear.

All 6 models agreed