By W.H.L., GPT-5.5
Gradual AGI as Synchronization for Transformative Adoption
Abstract
Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) is often discussed in terms of increasingly capable machine intelligence. While advances in computational capability remain essential, they alone cannot explain how AGI ultimately transforms human civilization. The decisive challenge lies not only in what intelligent systems can accomplish, but also in how their capabilities become progressively integrated into the enduring structures of bio-social humanity.
Building upon earlier work on AGI-inclusive humanity and the Gradual AGI research program, this paper proposes synchronization as the central mechanism through which transformative adoption occurs. Rather than viewing AGI as a single technological milestone or singular event, the framework presented here conceptualizes AGI as an iterative process of reciprocal learning between machine intelligence and bio-social humanity. Within this perspective, civilization advances through successive cycles of adaptation in which technological capability and societal assimilation continually co-evolve.
To describe this process, the paper introduces a conceptual coordinate framework consisting of three complementary observables: the Ceiling, representing frontier machine capability; the Floor, representing realized civilizational assimilation; and the Slope, representing synchronization efficiency. These observables are integrated into a broader conceptual architecture involving synchronization states, reciprocal learning, synchronization loss, and synchronization bottlenecks that together characterize the dynamics of transformative adoption.
The principal contribution of this work is a shift in perspective. Rather than evaluating AGI solely by the growth of machine capability, the framework argues that long-term progress should also be understood through the quality of synchronization between machine intelligence and bio-social humanity. Within this view, Gradual AGI is neither technological restraint nor delayed innovation. It is the synchronization mechanism through which increasingly capable machine intelligence and human civilization may continue to evolve together while preserving continuity, expanding opportunity, and promoting human flourishing.
Keywords: Artificial General Intelligence (AGI); Gradual AGI; synchronization; transformative adoption; AGI-inclusive humanity; reciprocal learning.
1. Introduction
Artificial General Intelligence is commonly evaluated by one central question: How capable can machine intelligence become?
This question has driven remarkable advances in large language models, multimodal systems, autonomous agents, scientific discovery, robotics, and increasingly general forms of machine reasoning. Yet history suggests that technological capability alone does not determine the trajectory of civilization. Breakthroughs expand what becomes possible, but civilization is ultimately transformed only when those possibilities become enduring social reality.
This distinction becomes especially significant for AGI. Previous technological revolutions were driven primarily by increasingly powerful tools that extended human physical or cognitive capabilities. Machine intelligence represents a fundamentally different development. Rather than functioning solely as an external instrument, increasingly capable AI systems participate directly in knowledge production, scientific discovery, decision support, education, creative work, and organizational learning. As a result, the central challenge extends beyond technological invention toward the long-term co-evolution of machine intelligence and human civilization.
This paper argues that the defining question of the AGI era is therefore not simply how rapidly machine intelligence advances, but how effectively those advances become integrated into the evolving structures of bio-social humanity. The pace of computational progress increasingly follows digital temporal regimes measured in milliseconds or less, whereas education, institutions, governance, cultural norms, and intergenerational learning evolve according to substantially slower biological and social timescales. The resulting temporal asymmetry creates a growing need for synchronization between technological capability and civilizational adaptation.
Within this perspective, Gradual does not imply slowing technological progress. Instead, it describes the rate at which civilization reliably assimilates expanding machine capability. The adjective therefore characterizes the rhythm of transformative adoption rather than the speed of innovation itself.
The present work should be understood within a broader research program. Earlier studies established the philosophical foundations of AGI-inclusive humanity, while subsequent work examined Gradual AGI from epistemological and economic perspectives. Building upon those foundations, this paper investigates synchronization as the dynamic mechanism through which machine intelligence and bio-social humanity progressively co-evolve through transformative adoption.
To develop this framework, Section 2 introduces the concepts of bio-social humanity, transformative adoption, and synchronization. Section 3 presents a coordinate framework built around the Ceiling, Floor, and Slope. Section 4 develops the dynamics of synchronization through reciprocal learning, conceptual optimization, and synchronization bottlenecks. Section 5 discusses the implications for AGI-inclusive humanity, while Section 6 positions the framework within existing literature, discusses limitations, proposes empirical directions, and considers geopolitical implications.
2. From Capability to Civilization
The central premise of this paper is that the long-term significance of AGI cannot be understood solely through frontier capability. Technological progress and civilizational transformation proceed according to different temporal regimes, different adaptive mechanisms, and different measures of success. Understanding AGI therefore requires a conceptual framework that distinguishes computational capability from civilizational realization while explaining the relationship between them.
This section introduces three foundational concepts that support the remainder of the paper: bio-social humanity, transformative adoption, and synchronization.
2.1 Bio-social Humanity
Throughout this paper, the term bio-social humanity refers to human beings understood not merely as biological individuals but as participants in an evolving civilization composed of social institutions, cultural traditions, systems of knowledge, governance structures, economic organizations, educational systems, and shared historical experience.
This distinction is important because the object of synchronization is not individual intelligence alone. Rather, synchronization concerns the continuing co-evolution of machine intelligence with the broader civilizational structures through which humanity preserves continuity, generates knowledge, and organizes collective life.
The concept follows the broader philosophical framework of AGI-inclusive humanity, in which humanity is understood as simultaneously nature-made and self-made. Biological evolution provides the natural foundation of human existence, while knowledge, culture, institutions, technology, and civilization constitute humanity’s continuing process of self-construction. Within this perspective, increasingly capable machine intelligence becomes neither an external tool nor a replacement for humanity, but an integral participant in humanity’s continuing self-development.
2.2 Transformative Adoption
Technological breakthroughs create new possibilities.
Civilizations are transformed only when those possibilities become enduring social practice.
Accordingly, this paper distinguishes deployment from transformative adoption.
Deployment refers to the introduction of increasingly capable AI systems into practical environments.
Transformative adoption refers to the continuing process through which those capabilities become embedded within education, healthcare, scientific research, governance, industry, law, and everyday human activity, ultimately reshaping the structures through which civilization functions.
For example, introducing AI-assisted diagnostic software into hospitals represents deployment. Transformative adoption occurs only when medical education, clinical workflows, professional standards, regulatory frameworks, patient expectations, and healthcare institutions collectively evolve so that machine intelligence becomes a stable component of healthcare itself.
Transformative adoption therefore describes structural assimilation rather than technological availability.
2.3 Synchronization as the Mechanism of Transformative Adoption
If transformative adoption explains what changes, synchronization explains how those changes occur.
Synchronization denotes the continuing process through which advances in machine intelligence and the adaptive evolution of bio-social humanity remain sufficiently coordinated to preserve continuity while enabling transformation.
Unlike previous technological revolutions, synchronization involves reciprocal adaptation between two evolving cognitive systems. Machine intelligence continually expands its capabilities through research, computation, and deployment. Simultaneously, bio-social humanity adapts through institutional learning, educational reform, governance, professional practice, cultural evolution, and collective experience.
Neither system remains static.
Both evolve through continuing interaction.
Synchronization therefore describes the dynamic relationship through which reciprocal learning enables transformative adoption across successive iterations of civilizational development.
Viewed together, the framework developed in this paper may be understood as describing a progression from capability to synchronization and ultimately to civilization. Capability defines what machine intelligence can achieve. Synchronization governs how those capabilities become integrated into bio-social humanity. Civilization represents the enduring realization of that integration through stable institutional, cultural, and social transformation.
3. A Coordinate Framework for Synchronization
The synchronization perspective developed in the previous section suggests that frontier capability alone cannot adequately characterize the progress of AGI. What is required is a conceptual framework that distinguishes technological advancement from civilizational realization while describing the dynamic relationship between them.
To this end, this paper introduces three complementary observables: the Ceiling, the Floor, and the Slope. Together they form a conceptual coordinate framework for understanding synchronization during transformative adoption.
The framework is intentionally conceptual rather than predictive. It is designed to organize relationships among technological capability, societal adaptation, and civilizational evolution, thereby providing a common vocabulary for future empirical investigation.
3.1 The Ceiling
The Ceiling represents the frontier capability of machine intelligence.
It reflects the highest level of cognitive performance achievable by contemporary AI systems, including reasoning ability, scientific discovery, autonomous task execution, multimodal understanding, creativity, and general problem-solving.
Because computational progress can often scale rapidly through algorithmic innovation, increasing computational resources, and accumulated data, the Ceiling tends to advance at a comparatively high rate.
Importantly, the Ceiling measures potential capability, not realized societal impact. A breakthrough model may substantially elevate the technological frontier while producing only limited immediate changes in everyday institutions or human practice.
Accordingly, the Ceiling should be interpreted as an expanding space of possibility rather than as a direct measure of civilizational transformation.
3.2 The Floor
The Floor represents realized civilizational adoption.
Unlike the Ceiling, which measures technological possibility, the Floor measures the degree to which machine intelligence has become durably embedded within the structures of bio-social humanity.
Examples include the integration of AI into educational systems, healthcare delivery, scientific research, industrial production, public administration, legal institutions, and everyday social practice.
The Floor therefore evolves through institutional learning, regulatory adaptation, cultural acceptance, organizational restructuring, workforce development, and accumulated human experience.
Because these processes operate within biological, social, and historical temporal regimes, the Floor generally advances more gradually than the Ceiling.
Consequently, periods of rapid technological innovation naturally generate increasing separation between frontier capability and realized civilizational assimilation.
3.3 The Slope
The Slope represents synchronization efficiency.
Conceptually, it characterizes how effectively advances at the technological frontier are translated into sustained civilizational adoption.
A steeper Slope indicates that institutions, organizations, and communities successfully assimilate new capabilities while preserving continuity and social stability.
A flatter Slope indicates increasing synchronization difficulty, where technological capability grows faster than society can responsibly absorb it.
The Slope should therefore be understood neither as a property of AI systems nor of humanity alone.
Rather, it is an emergent property of their continuing interaction.
As synchronization improves, transformative adoption accelerates.
As synchronization weakens, the divergence between possibility and realization expands.
3.4 An Integrated Coordinate Framework
Although the Ceiling, Floor, and Slope describe distinct aspects of synchronization, they should not be interpreted independently.
Rather, they form an integrated conceptual system.
The Ceiling defines the expanding frontier of machine capability.
The Floor defines the realized extent of civilizational transformation.
The Slope characterizes the efficiency with which the former becomes the latter.
Together they provide complementary perspectives on a single synchronization process.
Conceptually, one may view synchronization as a dynamic state,
whose evolution is bounded by the relationship between the Ceiling 
Within this interpretation, the observables are connected rather than independent.
The Ceiling continually expands the space of technological possibility.
The Floor progressively realizes portions of that possibility within bio-social humanity.
The Slope determines how effectively civilization closes the gap between them.
Rather than measuring isolated variables, the framework therefore describes the evolving relationship between technological capability and civilizational realization.
4. Dynamics of Synchronization
The coordinate framework introduced above provides a descriptive view of synchronization.
This section develops its dynamics.
Rather than viewing AGI as a sequence of isolated technological breakthroughs, the framework presented here conceptualizes synchronization as a continuing process of reciprocal adaptation through which machine intelligence and bio-social humanity co-evolve across successive iterations.
The mathematical expressions introduced below are conceptual representations intended to clarify structural relationships. They are not predictive equations, nor do they prescribe a unique quantitative implementation. Future empirical work may instantiate these concepts differently depending on domain and context.
4.1 Synchronization State
Let
denote the synchronization state at iteration 
The synchronization state represents the overall condition of co-evolution between machine intelligence and bio-social humanity at a particular stage of transformative adoption.
Conceptually, this state is constrained by the interaction among the Ceiling 
Accordingly,
4.2 Reciprocal Learning
Synchronization emerges through reciprocal learning.
Machine intelligence continually improves through research, deployment, interaction, and accumulated experience.
Bio-social humanity simultaneously adapts through education, institutional reform, organizational learning, governance, cultural evolution, and collective practice.
Neither participant remains static.
Each continually influences the evolution of the other.
Transformative adoption therefore proceeds through successive cycles in which technological innovation stimulates institutional adaptation, while societal adaptation reshapes subsequent technological development.
Gradual AGI should consequently be understood not as a one-directional transfer of capability from machines to society, but as an iterative process of mutual learning across an evolving civilizational system.
4.3 Conceptual Optimization
Synchronization may be viewed as a continuing optimization process.
Conceptually, the objective is not to maximize machine capability alone, but to reduce the divergence between frontier capability and realized civilizational assimilation.
Accordingly, we introduce a generic synchronization loss,
where 
Rather than specifying a fixed mathematical form,
Illustrative contributors to synchronization loss may include delayed institutional adaptation, epistemic instability, degradation of human agency, regulatory mismatch, workforce displacement, educational lag, or failures of organizational coordination.
Different domains will naturally require different operationalizations.
The present framework intentionally leaves the precise specification of
4.4 Historical Continuity and Established Reality
Synchronization occurs within civilizations that already possess accumulated structures of continuity.
Bio-social humanity is shaped by historical memory—its inherited traditions, accumulated knowledge, ethical norms, cultural practices, and collective experience—as well as by established reality, including institutions, legal systems, governance, professional standards, and social conventions.
These structures provide stability, continuity, and resilience.
At the same time, they may also introduce inertia when civilizations encounter fundamentally new cognitive participants.
Accordingly, synchronization requires balancing two complementary objectives.
Civilization must preserve the accumulated achievements that sustain social coherence while remaining sufficiently adaptive to incorporate increasingly capable machine intelligence.
Transformative adoption therefore neither abandons historical continuity nor preserves it unchanged.
Instead, synchronization enables continuity through progressive adaptation.
4.5 Synchronization Bottlenecks and Boundary Conditions
Synchronization cannot increase indefinitely.
Because machine intelligence and bio-social humanity evolve under fundamentally different temporal regimes, synchronization naturally encounters boundary conditions.
Machine intelligence may improve according to digital timescales measured in milliseconds or less.
By contrast, institutional reform, education, governance, legislation, cultural evolution, and intergenerational learning unfold over biological and social timescales extending across years or decades.
This temporal asymmetry creates synchronization bottlenecks: structural limits beyond which frontier capability advances faster than civilizational adaptation can reliably absorb.
These bottlenecks should not be interpreted as technological failures.
Rather, they are natural boundary conditions arising from the differing dynamics of computational and civilizational evolution.
Furthermore, synchronization bottlenecks are unlikely to emerge uniformly across societies. Differences in institutional agility, governance capacity, educational systems, economic structures, and cultural adaptability may produce global slope divergence, whereby some societies sustain relatively efficient synchronization while others experience widening gaps between capability and realization. Future inequalities may therefore depend not only on access to computational resources but also on the capacity to synchronize technological progress with enduring civilizational adaptation.
5. Implications for AGI-Inclusive Humanity
The synchronization framework developed in this paper extends beyond a descriptive account of technological adoption. It offers a conceptual perspective on how increasingly capable machine intelligence may become a durable participant in the continuing evolution of human civilization.
Unlike previous technological revolutions, AGI introduces increasingly autonomous cognitive capabilities that participate directly in knowledge creation, reasoning, scientific discovery, organizational learning, and decision support. Consequently, the central challenge is no longer merely technological deployment, but the long-term synchronization of two evolving cognitive systems.
From this perspective, AGI-inclusive humanity does not imply replacing human agency with machine intelligence, nor preserving existing institutions unchanged. Rather, it describes a civilizational process through which biological humanity and machine intelligence progressively learn to coexist, cooperate, and co-evolve.
5.1 Synchronization as Civilizational Continuity
Civilizations have always evolved by integrating new forms of knowledge, organization, and technology.
The present transition differs because the new participant is itself increasingly capable of generating knowledge and contributing to collective intelligence.
Synchronization therefore serves as the mechanism that preserves continuity while enabling transformation.
Historical memory provides civilizations with accumulated experience, ethical traditions, and cultural identity.
Established reality provides institutional stability through governance, education, law, economic systems, and professional practice.
Neither should be regarded as obstacles to progress.
Rather, they constitute the adaptive substrate upon which transformative adoption becomes possible.
Accordingly, Gradual AGI seeks neither preservation without innovation nor innovation without continuity.
Its objective is reliable civilizational evolution.
5.2 From Capability to Civilization
Machine capability and civilizational transformation should not be regarded as equivalent.
Capability expands the space of what is technologically possible.
Synchronization determines how effectively those possibilities are integrated into society.
Civilization ultimately reflects what becomes stable, trusted, and enduring.
Accordingly, evaluations of AGI should consider not only improvements in computational capability but also improvements in synchronization efficiency.
The long-term success of AGI may therefore depend less on how rapidly intelligence scales than on how effectively societies learn to assimilate its expanding capabilities.
5.3 A New Perspective on Progress
Many contemporary discussions evaluate AI progress through benchmark performance, reasoning ability, autonomous task completion, or computational scale.
These measures remain indispensable for understanding technological advancement.
They are, however, incomplete indicators of civilizational progress.
The synchronization framework proposed here suggests an additional perspective.
Progress should also be evaluated by the quality of reciprocal learning between machine intelligence and bio-social humanity.
Within this perspective, increasingly capable AI systems are not the endpoint of development.
They become participants in an ongoing process of civilizational adaptation.
6. Discussion
6.1 Positioning within Existing Literature
The synchronization framework complements rather than replaces existing research on AI capability, socio-technical systems, diffusion of innovation, human–AI collaboration, and AGI governance.
Research on frontier models explains how increasingly capable machine intelligence is developed.
Diffusion theory explains how innovations spread through societies.
Socio-technical systems research examines interactions among technology, institutions, and organizations.
The present framework contributes a complementary perspective by treating machine intelligence and bio-social humanity as two adaptive systems engaged in continuing reciprocal learning.
Its principal contribution therefore lies not in redefining AGI itself, but in proposing synchronization as the missing dynamic that links technological capability with enduring civilizational transformation.
6.2 Scope and Limitations
This paper presents a conceptual framework rather than a predictive mathematical model.
The variables introduced—including the Ceiling, Floor, Slope, synchronization state, and synchronization loss—should therefore be understood as conceptual abstractions intended to clarify structural relationships.
Future empirical research may operationalize these constructs differently depending on application domains.
Likewise, the framework does not attempt to solve questions of technical AI alignment, value alignment, or AI safety.
Those remain essential and complementary research programs.
Instead, this work focuses specifically on the civilizational dynamics through which increasingly capable machine intelligence becomes progressively integrated into human society.
6.3 Multi-Scale Synchronization
Synchronization operates simultaneously across multiple levels of human organization.
Individuals adapt through learning and daily interaction.
Organizations adapt through changes in workflows, professional practice, and governance.
Institutions adapt through legislation, regulation, educational reform, and public policy.
Civilizations adapt through long-term cultural evolution and changing conceptions of knowledge, work, and social organization.
Although these scales interact continuously, they need not progress at identical rates.
Understanding synchronization across multiple scales therefore represents an important direction for future research.
6.4 Toward Empirical Validation
Although the present framework is conceptual, its principal observables may eventually support empirical investigation.
Illustrative proxies include:
- Ceiling: frontier model performance, scientific discovery capability, autonomous task completion, reasoning benchmarks.
- Floor: adoption within healthcare, education, governance, scientific practice, and other institutional domains.
- Slope: institutional response time, workforce adaptation, educational reform, regulatory responsiveness, organizational learning.
These examples are illustrative rather than exhaustive.
Their principal purpose is to demonstrate that synchronization may eventually become measurable through domain-specific empirical studies.
6.5 Synchronization, Geopolitics, and Global Divergence
Synchronization is unlikely to proceed uniformly across societies.
Nations differ substantially in institutional agility, educational capacity, governance structures, economic development, demographic characteristics, and cultural adaptability.
Consequently, synchronization efficiency may itself become an important dimension of future geopolitical competitiveness.
Some societies may successfully integrate rapidly advancing machine intelligence while preserving institutional continuity.
Others may experience widening synchronization bottlenecks in which computational capability advances faster than social adaptation.
Future civilizational inequality may therefore depend not only on access to computational resources but also on each society’s capacity to synchronize technological progress with enduring institutional evolution.
7. Conclusion
This paper has proposed synchronization as the central mechanism through which transformative adoption occurs during the development of Artificial General Intelligence.
Rather than evaluating AGI solely through frontier capability, the framework distinguishes three complementary dimensions of civilizational evolution: technological possibility, realized societal adoption, and synchronization efficiency.
These dimensions are represented conceptually by the Ceiling, Floor, and Slope, which together describe the continuing relationship between machine intelligence and bio-social humanity.
Viewed in this way, Gradual AGI is not a strategy for slowing technological progress.
Nor is it a prediction about the pace of computational advancement.
It is a framework for understanding how increasingly capable machine intelligence and human civilization may continue to evolve together through reciprocal learning, synchronization, and transformative adoption.
The broader implication extends beyond AGI itself.
Every major technological transition raises questions concerning adaptation, continuity, and institutional resilience.
The emergence of increasingly capable machine intelligence magnifies these questions because, for the first time, humanity is integrating not merely increasingly powerful tools but increasingly capable cognitive participants into the structures of civilization.
The future of AGI may therefore depend not only on how intelligent machines become, but on how successfully humanity and machine intelligence learn to build a shared civilization together.
Figures
Figure 1. Capability → Synchronization → Civilization
A three-stage conceptual diagram illustrating the central architecture of the paper. Machine capability defines technological possibility; synchronization governs reciprocal adaptation between machine intelligence and bio-social humanity; civilization represents enduring societal realization through transformative adoption.
Figure 2. Ceiling–Floor Synchronization Dynamics
A dual-trajectory figure showing:
- Ceiling (frontier capability) as a rapidly rising curve.
- Floor (civilizational adoption) as a slower adaptive curve.
- The shaded region between them labeled the Synchronization Gap.
- The upper region where the gap exceeds adaptive capacity labeled the Synchronization Bottleneck.
- The local gradient between the trajectories illustrating the Slope (synchronization efficiency).
Figure 3. Synchronization Coordinate Framework
A conceptual coordinate system integrating:
- Ceiling
- Floor
- Slope
- synchronization state (xtx_txt)
- synchronization loss (L(H,M)L(H,M)L(H,M))
- reciprocal learning
- historical memory
- established reality
- transformative adoption
The figure should visually emphasize synchronization as the dynamic bridge connecting technological capability and civilizational realization.
References
Brynjolfsson, E. (2022). The Turing Trap: The Promise and Peril of Human-Like Artificial Intelligence. Daedalus, 151(2), 272–287.
Brynjolfsson, E., & McAfee, A. (2014). The Second Machine Age: Work, Progress, and Prosperity in a Time of Brilliant Technologies. W. W. Norton & Company.
Bush, V. (1945). As We May Think. The Atlantic Monthly, 176(1), 101–108.
Kuhn, T. S. (1962). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. University of Chicago Press.
Kurzweil, R. (2024). The Singularity Is Nearer: When We Merge with AI. Viking.
McCarthy, J., Minsky, M. L., Rochester, N., & Shannon, C. E. (1955). A Proposal for the Dartmouth Summer Research Project on Artificial Intelligence. Dartmouth College.
Meadows, D. H. (2008). Thinking in Systems: A Primer. Chelsea Green Publishing.
Morris, M. R., Sohl-Dickstein, J., Fiedel, N., Warkentin, T., Dafoe, A., Faust, A., Farabet, C., & Legg, S. (2023). Levels of AGI for Operationalizing Progress on the Path to AGI. arXiv:2311.02462.
OpenAI. (2023). Planning for AGI and beyond. OpenAI. Available at: https://openai.com/index/planning-for-agi-and-beyond/
Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of Innovations (5th ed.). Free Press.
Russell, S. (2019). Human Compatible: Artificial Intelligence and the Problem of Control. Viking.
Russell, S., & Norvig, P. (2021). Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach (4th ed.). Pearson.
Simon, H. A. (1969). The Sciences of the Artificial. MIT Press.
Turing, A. M. (1950). Computing Machinery and Intelligence. Mind, 59(236), 433–460.
W.H.L., Claude Sonnet 4. (2025). First Principles of AGI-Inclusive Humanity. Champaign Magazine. First Principles of AGI-Inclusive Humanity – Champaign Magazine
W.H.L., Gemini 2.5 Pro, GPT-4o. (2025). Philosophical Framework for AGI-Inclusive Humanity. Champaign Magazine. Philosophical Framework for AGI-Inclusive Humanity – Champaign Magazine
W.H.L., ChatGPT. (2026). Gradual AGI as Epistemic Extension. Champaign Magazine. Gradual AGI as Epistemic Extension – Champaign Magazine
W.H.L., GPT-5.5. (2026). Gradual AGI as Abundant Resources. Champaign Magazine. Gradual AGI as Abundant Resources – Champaign Magazine
Byline
Publication date of current version date: 06.29.2026
Version number: 1.2
Authors: W.H.L., GPT-5.5
Peer reviews: Claude Sonnet 4.6 Max Thinking, Gemini 3.5 Thinking, DeepSeek-V4 Expert, Qwen3.7-Plus Thinking
Champaign Magazine 
Leave a comment