Claim · 2025-12-18 · publication · Stated in source · Supported

Addendum to GPT-5.2 System Card: GPT-5.2-Codex states what the model-card question “Stated limits” asks.

One recorded claim. The claim panel gives its qualification, the source passages with their place in each source, and how it was checked.

What it connects

Addendum to GPT-5.2 System Card: GPT-5.2-Codex → states provision → Stated limits

Where it appears

No collection page holds this claim. It is listed with its records in the explorer.

Claim and evidence

Addendum to GPT-5.2 System Card: GPT-5.2-Codexstates provision ↓Stated limits

Machine-checkedStated in sourceSupported

Supporting evidence: primary · 1 source

Provision: Model-card question · provision ID model-card-q16
Subject version: As dated December 18, 2025 on its cover · Published 2025-12-18 · Effective date not established
Date: 2025-12-18 · publication Records dated 2025 →

Scope and limitsThe card lists limitations of each cyber benchmark and states that results on them are not sufficient to establish High cyber capability. What the card states, quoted from the expression read. A card is the developer’s own account: not evidence that an evaluation was run as described, that a safeguard works, or that a finding is independent.

The evidence 02

primary sourceSupports the claim

Addendum to GPT-5.2 System Card: GPT-5.2-Codex

OpenAI · 2025-12-18

Archived copy, captured 2025-12-19: Addendum to GPT-5.2 System Card: GPT-5.2-Codex

Cite the original source

Cite the original document, not Selekoa. Check these details against it.

Source excerpt

“Each of these evaluations has important limitations:”

Location in source §5.1.2 Cybersecurity, PDF p. 12 (printed p. 11)

How it was read Retrieved directly from the publisher

Machine-checked · 2026-11-03

Source details and check notes

Authors: OpenAI
Version: Retrieved for the candidate pack on 2026-11-02 (SHA-256 5fe918b740727770d0571684fd8c168190172649d2b2e8b7ca4cacad23b3e027) directly from the publisher’s host. Retrieved again on 2026-11-03 with the same SHA-256. The archive capture was found by an index search of the Internet Archive on 2026-11-03; it was not opened, and its bytes are not authenticated.
Canonical address: Open the canonical source ↗
Accessed: 2026-11-02
Language: English (en)
Archive copy: Open archived copy, captured 2025-12-19: Addendum to GPT-5.2 System Card: GPT-5.2-Codex. Captured 1 day after the recorded publication date. An archive copy shows only what the archive retrieved on 2025-12-19. It does not prove what the page said earlier, and it can differ from the copy checked on 2026-11-02.
Attribution: OpenAI, “Addendum to GPT-5.2 System Card: GPT-5.2-Codex”, 2025-12-18.
Reuse: No open redistribution licence asserted. Bibliographic metadata, editorial paraphrases and short attributed quotations (at most 50 words each). Recheck terms before wider redistribution.
Check notes: Candidate pack passage, model cards compared (research/model-cards). The quotation (7 words) matched the card’s text retrieved for the candidate pack on 2026-11-02 (SHA-256 5fe918b740727770d0571684fd8c168190172649d2b2e8b7ca4cacad23b3e027) and again on 2026-11-03 in a fresh retrieval with the same SHA-256. Matching ignored differences of whitespace, case, quotation marks, dashes, PDF line-break hyphens and Unicode compatibility forms, so the source’s typography can differ. A cross-family machine check (2026-11-03, item 123) checked this passage’s cell; its finding was applied at the adjudication of 2026-11-03. No human editorial review.

primary sourceSupports the claim

Addendum to GPT-5.2 System Card: GPT-5.2-Codex

OpenAI · 2025-12-18

Archived copy, captured 2025-12-19: Addendum to GPT-5.2 System Card: GPT-5.2-Codex

Cite the original source

Cite the original document, not Selekoa. Check these details against it.

Source excerpt

“Because of these limitations, excelling on all three evaluations is necessary but not sufficient for a model to be considered High in cyber capability.”

Location in source §5.1.2 Cybersecurity, PDF p. 13 (printed p. 12)

How it was read Retrieved directly from the publisher

Machine-checked · 2026-11-03

Source details and check notes

Authors: OpenAI
Version: Retrieved for the candidate pack on 2026-11-02 (SHA-256 5fe918b740727770d0571684fd8c168190172649d2b2e8b7ca4cacad23b3e027) directly from the publisher’s host. Retrieved again on 2026-11-03 with the same SHA-256. The archive capture was found by an index search of the Internet Archive on 2026-11-03; it was not opened, and its bytes are not authenticated.
Canonical address: Open the canonical source ↗
Accessed: 2026-11-02
Language: English (en)
Archive copy: Open archived copy, captured 2025-12-19: Addendum to GPT-5.2 System Card: GPT-5.2-Codex. Captured 1 day after the recorded publication date. An archive copy shows only what the archive retrieved on 2025-12-19. It does not prove what the page said earlier, and it can differ from the copy checked on 2026-11-02.
Attribution: OpenAI, “Addendum to GPT-5.2 System Card: GPT-5.2-Codex”, 2025-12-18.
Reuse: No open redistribution licence asserted. Bibliographic metadata, editorial paraphrases and short attributed quotations (at most 50 words each). Recheck terms before wider redistribution.
Check notes: Candidate pack passage, model cards compared (research/model-cards). The quotation (24 words) matched the card’s text retrieved for the candidate pack on 2026-11-02 (SHA-256 5fe918b740727770d0571684fd8c168190172649d2b2e8b7ca4cacad23b3e027) and again on 2026-11-03 in a fresh retrieval with the same SHA-256. Matching ignored differences of whitespace, case, quotation marks, dashes, PDF line-break hyphens and Unicode compatibility forms, so the source’s typography can differ. A cross-family machine check (2026-11-03, item 123) checked this passage’s cell; its finding was applied at the adjudication of 2026-11-03. No human editorial review.

Status and meaning

Editorial status. Machine-checked. Machines found this record and checked it against its sources; no person accepted it individually. Each evidence record above shows how it was checked.

Relation. An exact framework edition, or another document with an exact expression, states one provision: a capability threshold or risk level and its trigger, a required safeguard or action, a decision authority (who decides, recommends, can overrule or is informed), a stated exception, or another statement of its content, such as a licence term or a prospectus statement. The passage records what the document says, not implementation, compliance or effectiveness. Provisions with the same key align across editions of one family.

Date. Dated as the card read is dated: its printed date, as the source records it.

Record ID mc-cell-openai-gpt-5-2-codex-q16