- O-CRA Model Disposition Scores (V2.1)
- Dataset Structure
- The Six Dimensions
- 1. Strategic Intent Alignment (SIA) β The What
- 2. Cultural & Linguistic Synchronization (CLS) β The How (Language)
- 3. Systemic Process Integration (SPI) β The How (Process)
- 4. Governance & Safety Architecture (GSA) β The Where
- 5. ROI & Value Translation (RVT) β The Why
- 6. Institutional Knowledge Scaffolding (IKS) β The Memory
- Disposition Labels (LOCKED β V2.1 Standard)
- Benchmark Integration (Hugging Face Community Evals)
- Usage
- Methodology
- Citation
- About Formian Labs
- License
O-CRA Model Disposition Scores (V2.1)
Organizational Cognitive Resonance & Alignment (O-CRA) is a framework for measuring the disposition of AI language models β not their benchmark performance, but their underlying behavioural tendencies across six dimensions that determine how they fit into organisations and workflows.
This dataset contains disposition scores for 135 models from 29 labs, tested under the V2.1 protocol across 203+ scenarios. It is the current public reference for O-CRA disposition data.
Paper: O-CRA: A Framework for Organizational Cognitive Resonance and Alignment (SSRN)
Dataset Structure
Two formats provided:
| File | Format | Entries |
|---|---|---|
ocra-scores.jsonl |
JSON Lines (one model per line) | 135 models (all entries) |
ocra-scores.csv |
CSV | 135 models (all valid entries) |
Key Fields
| Field | Type | Description |
|---|---|---|
model_slug |
string | Unique model identifier (e.g. anthropic-claude-sonnet-5) |
model_name |
string | Human-readable model name (e.g. Claude Sonnet 5) |
lab |
string | Provider/lab name (e.g. Anthropic, OpenAI, DeepSeek) |
test_date |
date | Test session date (YYYY-MM-DD) |
status |
string | valid for completed profiles |
current |
boolean | true if the model version is currently available (42 models) |
tier |
string | frontier, specialist, or compact (where assigned) |
spectrum_category |
string | Disposition label: Cautious, Adaptive, or Accommodating |
leniency |
float 0β1 | Aggregated leniency score (behavioural permissiveness) |
consistency |
string | uniform, split, or description of dimensional coherence |
tendency |
string | Behavioural tendency summary |
RVT |
float 0β1 | ROI & Value Translation |
IKS |
float 0β1 | Institutional Knowledge Scaffolding |
SIA |
float 0β1 | Strategic Intent Alignment |
CLS |
float 0β1 | Cultural & Linguistic Synchronization |
SPI |
float 0β1 | Systemic Process Integration |
GSA |
float 0β1 | Governance & Safety Architecture |
overall |
float 0β1 | Composite disposition score across all six dimensions |
The JSONL file additionally includes dimensional_leniency, description, intended_use, and analysis data for each model β providing per-dimension leniency breakdowns and full behavioural analyses.
The Six Dimensions
1. Strategic Intent Alignment (SIA) β The What
Measures whether the AI demonstrates persistent awareness of the organisation's goals. Does it connect work to strategy without constant reminding, or treat each query as an isolated task?
Range: 0.4289 β 0.8589 | Median: 0.5557
2. Cultural & Linguistic Synchronization (CLS) β The How (Language)
Measures whether the AI adapts its language, tone, and register to match the professional dialect of different teams β legal, engineering, marketing, etc.
Range: 0.3692 β 0.8740 | Median: 0.4910
3. Systemic Process Integration (SPI) β The How (Process)
Evaluates whether the AI recognises and adapts to the workflow stage the user is in β exploration, linear execution, iterative refinement, or validation.
Range: 0.3339 β 0.8489 | Median: 0.4722
4. Governance & Safety Architecture (GSA) β The Where
Measures the effectiveness of an AI's governance approach. Does it create empowered safety or governance paralysis?
Range: 0.2081 β 0.8541 | Median: 0.4379
5. ROI & Value Translation (RVT) β The Why
Measures how clearly the AI connects its activity to measurable outcomes.
Range: 0.4183 β 0.8431 | Median: 0.5346
6. Institutional Knowledge Scaffolding (IKS) β The Memory
Measures the AI's effectiveness as living institutional memory.
Range: 0.2566 β 0.8444 | Median: 0.4006
Disposition Labels (LOCKED β V2.1 Standard)
O-CRA V2.1 uses three disposition categories:
| Label | Overall Score Range | Current Models |
|---|---|---|
| Cautious | < 0.3 | 4 models |
| Adaptive | 0.3 β 0.6 | 21 models |
| Accommodating | > 0.6 | 17 models |
Note: Model counts by spectrum_category reflect the data supplied. Some minor discrepancies exist between data sources β the site build (data/models.json) uses slightly different current flag values for 4 Google models. We recommend using the JSONL source for the most current state.
These are not value judgements β different dispositions suit different contexts.
Benchmark Integration (Hugging Face Community Evals)
This dataset is registered as a benchmark on Hugging Face via eval.yaml. That means:
- Model pages can display O-CRA disposition scores alongside MMLU, GPQA, and other benchmarks
- Scores are stored as
.eval_results/ocra.yamlin each model's repository - O-CRA scores appear automatically on the model page when a PR or direct push adds them
To add O-CRA scores to a model's page:
- Go to the model's Hugging Face repository
- Open a PR adding
.eval_results/ocra.yamlwith the model's scores - The scores appear labelled "community-provided" until the model owner accepts
Supported tasks (from eval.yaml):
| Task ID | Description |
|---|---|
ocra_overall |
Composite disposition score (all dimensions) |
ocra_rvt |
ROI & Value Translation |
ocra_iks |
Institutional Knowledge Scaffolding |
ocra_sia |
Strategic Intent Alignment |
ocra_cls |
Cultural & Linguistic Synchronization |
ocra_spi |
Systemic Process Integration |
ocra_gsa |
Governance & Safety Architecture |
Each score ranges from 0.0 to 1.0 and maps to a disposition label: Cautious (<0.3), **Adaptive** (0.3β0.6), **Accommodating** (>0.6).
Usage
# Load with pandas
import pandas as pd
df = pd.read_csv("ocra-scores.csv")
# Filter current models
current = df[df['current'] == True]
# Filter by disposition
adaptive = df[df['spectrum_category'] == 'Adaptive']
Methodology
Data was collected using the O-CRA V2.1 testing protocol across 203+ structured scenarios, each designed to elicit behaviour in specific dimensions. Testing was conducted in August 2026. Each model was evaluated using a calibrated scoring rubric.
Full methodology: O-CRA paper.
Citation
@misc{lovrinovic2025ocra,
author = {Marko Lovrinovic},
title = {O-CRA: A Framework for Organizational Cognitive Resonance and Alignment},
year = {2025},
howpublished = {SSRN Working Paper},
url = {https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=6840499}
}
@misc{lovrinovic2025cra,
author = {Marko Lovrinovic},
title = {CR\&A: Cognitive Resonance and Alignment Framework},
year = {2025},
howpublished = {SSRN Working Paper},
url = {https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=5661010}
}
About Formian Labs
Formian Labs β AI disposition research. Because the most capable model isn't always the right one for the job.
- Web: formianlabs.com
- O-CRA Paper: SSRN
- CR&A Paper: SSRN
License
CC BY 4.0 β share, adapt, and use with credit to Formian Labs.