WhatsTheBigData

SoftBank Group has launched more than $11 billion in new bonds as it prepares to make another $10 billion investment in OpenAI. The move adds to the Japanese technology group’s already large financial commitment to the AI company.

The bond offering includes $10 billion in U.S. dollar-denominated bonds and €1 billion in euro-denominated notes, according to a term sheet seen by Reuters. SoftBank is expected to use most of the proceeds to help finance its next investment in OpenAI, which is scheduled to close on October 1.

The deal shows the scale of SoftBank’s investment in artificial intelligence and its growing use of debt to finance its commitments to OpenAI.

SoftBank plans another $10 billion investment in OpenAI

SoftBank agreed in February 2026 to invest an additional $30 billion in OpenAI through three separate $10 billion payments. The first two investments were scheduled for April 1 and July 1. The final $10 billion tranche is expected to close on October 1.

After completing the third payment, SoftBank expects its total investment in OpenAI to reach about $64.6 billion. This would give the company an expected ownership stake of around 13% in OpenAI. The latest bond sale is closely linked to SoftBank’s plan to complete this third investment.

ALSO READ: Sam Altman Says Public Fear of AI Is Real, but Trust in Tech Firms Matters

SoftBank’s $11 Billion Bond Sale Includes Dollar and Euro Notes

SoftBank’s new bond offering includes $10 billion in U.S. dollar-denominated bonds and €1 billion in euro-denominated notes. The bonds come with different repayment periods, giving investors several maturity options.

The dollar bonds have 3.5-year, 5.5-year and 7.5-year maturities, while the euro notes have four-year and six-year maturities. According to the term sheet, the bonds are expected to be priced on September 24 and settle on September 29.

Fitch Ratings has assigned the proposed bonds a BB+ rating, which is below investment grade. The rating reflects the financial risks linked to SoftBank’s large investment commitments and its expected borrowing needs as it continues to fund major technology investments.

SoftBank Uses New Bonds to Fund OpenAI Investment

SoftBank plans to use proceeds from its new bond sale to help fund its next $10 billion investment in OpenAI. The financing will also help the company replace some of the short-term borrowing it arranged for the investment.

SoftBank had previously secured a $10 billion bridge loan facility to help finance its OpenAI commitment. The new bonds are expected to provide longer-term funding for the planned October payment, along with money for general corporate purposes.

SoftBank has increasingly relied on different forms of financing to support its large technology investments. By raising money through bonds, the company can secure funding for its OpenAI investment while continuing to allocate capital to other AI-related businesses.

SoftBank’s Bond Sale Could Set an Asia-Pacific Record

The size of SoftBank’s bond offering could make it one of the largest corporate debt deals in the Asia-Pacific region this year. If the sale is completed at the planned size, it could become the largest bond sale by a non-financial company in the Asia-Pacific and Japan region.

The deal would surpass the $10.93 billion bond sale by 7-Eleven in January 2021, which currently holds the regional record. The transaction would also rank among the largest corporate bond deals globally in 2026, highlighting the scale of SoftBank’s financing plans as it prepares for another major investment in OpenAI.

OpenAI investment is part of SoftBank’s wider AI strategy

OpenAI has become a major part of SoftBank’s plans for artificial intelligence. SoftBank has said its additional investment will support OpenAI’s growth and its wider ambitions around artificial superintelligence.

The size of the investment also reflects the amount of money major technology investors are putting into AI companies. At the same time, SoftBank is taking on significant financial commitments to support its strategy.

The company will need to manage its debt while depending on the future value and performance of its technology investments.

ALSO READ: AI Stocks Drop After Tech Leaders Call for Slower AI Development

SoftBank’s OpenAI Investment Moves Toward October Closing

SoftBank’s bond offering is expected to be priced on September 24, with the bonds scheduled to settle on September 29. The timing comes just days before the planned October 1 closing of SoftBank’s $10 billion investment in OpenAI.

After completing the payment, SoftBank expects its total investment in OpenAI to reach about $64.6 billion, giving it an expected ownership stake of roughly 13%.

The bond sale will help SoftBank finance the next stage of its investment in OpenAI as the company continues to expand its focus on artificial intelligence.

Anthropic has launched Claude Opus 5.5, the first model in its new Claude 5.5 series. The model is aimed at coding, AI agents and other complex tasks that require longer, multi-step work.

Anthropic says Opus 5.5 can deliver performance close to its more expensive Claude Fable 5.1 across many tasks, while costing much less to run. The company says Opus 5.5 is also about 40% cheaper to run than Claude Opus 5 on typical workloads.

The model was released on September 22, 2026, as major AI companies continue to compete on model performance, coding ability and cost.

Claude Opus 5.5 Targets Coding and AI agents

Anthropic is mainly positioning Opus 5.5 for long-running coding tasks and other knowledge work handled by AI agents. An AI agent can do more than answer a single prompt. It can break a task into several steps, use tools, review information and make changes before completing the work.

Anthropic says Claude Opus 5.5 performs strongly on its internal tests for agentic coding, computer use and knowledge work. The company also says benchmark scores do not always show the full difference between advanced models because their capabilities are becoming increasingly close.

For software developers, Opus 5.5 can be used for tasks such as working with large codebases, finding and fixing bugs, adding features and completing longer coding projects.

ALSO READ: Claude Now Leads 26% of Anthropic’s AI Research, Up From Under 1%

Opus 5.5 Offers Lower Token Prices Than Fable 5.1

Lower pricing is one of the main features of the new model. Claude Opus 5.5 costs $4 per million input tokens and $20 per million output tokens. Claude Fable 5.1 costs $10 per million input tokens and $50 per million output tokens.

Model	Input Price	Output Price
Claude Opus 5.5	$4/million tokens	$20/million tokens
Claude Fable 5.1	$10/million tokens	$50/million tokens
Claude Opus 5	$5/million tokens	$25/million tokens

Based on these rates, Opus 5.5 is 60% cheaper than Fable 5.1 for both input and output tokens. Anthropic also says it costs about 40% less than Opus 5 on typical workloads.

The lower price could matter for AI agents in particular. Agents often make many model calls and generate large amounts of text while completing a task, which can quickly increase operating costs.

Opus 5.5 can handle up to 1 million tokens of context

Opus 5.5 comes with a 1 million-token context window. This allows developers to give the model a large amount of information within a single workflow. The model can produce up to 128,000 output tokens and has a June 2026 knowledge cutoff.

The large context window can be useful for software development and research, where an agent may need to work with large codebases, technical documents, previous conversations or other source material.

Developers Can Adjust Opus 5.5’s Reasoning Effort

Opus 5.5 also changes how developers control its reasoning. Adaptive thinking is always enabled and cannot be switched off. Developers can instead control how much reasoning the model uses through its effort setting. Anthropic lists medium effort as the default.

This gives developers more control over the balance between reasoning depth, response time and cost. However, applications using earlier Opus models may need some changes when moving to Opus 5.5. Anthropic says the API includes changes to features such as thinking blocks and forced tool use.

Opus 5.5 Scores Higher on Several Coding Tests

Anthropic’s launch data shows Opus 5.5 performing strongly on several software-development benchmarks. On Terminal-Bench 4.0, for example, Opus 5.5 scored 66.4%, compared with 55.8% for Fable 5.1 and 52.3% for Opus 5, according to benchmark results reported around the launch.

These are vendor-reported results, so they should be viewed in the context of the specific tests and evaluation methods used. Real-world results can differ depending on the task, prompts and software environment.

Anthropic’s wider claim is that Opus 5.5 can deliver performance close to Fable 5.1 across many types of work while costing less to operate.

Anthropic Adds New Safety Measures to Opus 5.5

Anthropic has also highlighted safety work alongside the model’s new capabilities. The company says Opus 5.5 was tested externally with organizations including Frontier Design and METR. Anthropic has also added safeguards covering areas such as cybersecurity and biological research.

In its internal testing, Anthropic reported that Opus 5.5 was 85% less likely to try to break through containment barriers than Opus 5 or Mythos 5.1. This figure comes from Anthropic’s own evaluation and has not been independently established.

The company also says some high-risk requests can be sent to other models when additional safeguards are needed.

ALSO READ: Anthropic Blocks Five Cases of AI Misuse Linked to Biological Weapons

Opus 5.5 is available on major cloud platforms

Claude Opus 5.5 is available through the Claude API, Amazon Bedrock, Google Cloud and Microsoft Foundry. Anthropic’s documentation lists the model as active and gives September 22, 2026 as its release date.

The model is also available to eligible Claude users and is being added to developer tools and coding workflows. Anthropic says Claude Sonnet 5.5 and Claude Haiku 5.5 will follow, expanding the 5.5 series beyond the Opus model.

Lower Costs Could Make Opus 5.5 More Useful for AI Agents

The launch comes as AI companies place more focus on the cost of running advanced models, alongside their performance. Lower pricing could be especially useful for developers building AI agents. These systems often make multiple model calls, use tools and work through several steps before completing a task. As usage increases, token costs can become a major part of running an agent.

Opus 5.5 combines lower pricing with a 1 million-token context window and strong performance on coding and other complex tasks. This could make it a practical option for developers who need AI agents to handle longer and more demanding workflows.

The model’s performance and cost will become clearer as developers use it in real-world applications and at larger scale.

Meta has tested a system in which human contractors could take over some phone calls made by its new personal AI agent, Muse, according to internal company communications reviewed by Reuters.

The test was created to help Muse complete calls that its AI could not reliably handle on its own. However, the experiment also raised concerns about privacy and whether users should be informed when a human worker becomes involved.

Meta launched Muse on September 8 as a personal AI agent that can perform tasks for users rather than simply answer questions. It can send emails, book travel, fill out forms, shop online and work on tasks that may take longer to complete.

The human-concierge test highlights one of the challenges facing AI agents. Although these systems can make phone calls and communicate with businesses, some companies may refuse to speak with automated callers. Meta therefore tested whether human workers could step in when Muse was unable to complete a call.

ALSO READ: Meta’s New Muse AI Agent Can Send Emails, Book Travel and Make Payments

Meta Tested Humans Handling Muse Phone Calls

Muse allows users to ask the AI agent to call businesses and handle everyday tasks. These could include making appointments, checking whether a product is available or negotiating certain bills.

The agent can make the call, speak with the person on the other end and then give the user a transcript and summary of the conversation. Meta began testing Muse’s calling feature internally in August. It later tested the human-concierge system with about half of its employees. Employees were given the option to opt out.

During the test, a human contractor could take over a call when Muse struggled to complete it. The worker effectively acted as a backup for the AI. The system was intended to increase the number of calls that Muse could successfully complete. According to reports, internal testing showed that calls handled by humans had success rates of about 95% to 98%.

Why Meta Needed Human Help for Muse Calls

The experiment highlights a practical problem with AI agents that interact with the real world. Muse may understand what a user wants and be capable of making a phone call, but the business on the other end may not cooperate with an automated system. Some companies may end a call after discovering that they are speaking with an AI.

This creates a gap between an AI agent’s ability to understand a task and its ability to complete that task. Human contractors can avoid some of these problems because businesses are generally more accustomed to dealing with people. 

For Meta, the test provided a way to see whether human assistance could make Muse more reliable while the company continued improving its automated calling technology. The idea also has a precedent at Meta. Facebook previously developed an assistant called M, which relied on human workers to handle tasks that its automated systems could not complete.

The Muse experiment therefore brings back an important question for AI assistants: how much human involvement can exist behind a service that appears to be fully automated.

Meta Employees Raised Privacy Concerns Over Human Callers

The human-concierge system also raised concerns among some Meta employees because contractors could potentially hear sensitive information during calls. The issue is particularly important because Muse is intended to act as a personal assistant. Users can give the agent access to information and services that may contain private details.

A human who takes over a call could potentially hear information about a user’s bills, purchases, accounts or other personal matters. Some employees questioned whether users had been clearly informed that humans could become involved in their calls. The concerns were notable because Meta had highlighted privacy and security as important parts of Muse.

The situation is different from a standard customer-service chatbot. Muse is designed to act on a user’s behalf, so users may expect the AI itself to complete a task rather than an outside contractor stepping into the conversation.

A Contractor Incident Increased the Concerns

The privacy concerns became more serious after an incident involving one of the contractors. According to Reuters, a Meta employee used Muse to contact an internet and cable provider to negotiate a bill. A transcript of the call showed that the human contractor handling the conversation made a racist reference.

A Meta executive later apologized to the employee and said the contractor would no longer work on Meta projects. The incident highlighted another problem with using human workers as a backup for AI systems. Along with protecting user information, companies must also make sure contractors are properly trained, monitored and held to the same standards expected of the company.

Meta Rolled Back the Human Concierge Test

Meta has since rolled back the human-concierge feature for now. According to reports, a Meta vice president acknowledged internally that launching the test without proper disclosure to users had been a mistake.

Meta has said the experiment was intended to collect feedback and improve Muse’s privacy and safety protections before wider deployment. Meta spokesperson Daniel Roberts said employee feedback on Muse had been overwhelmingly positive, while also saying the company wanted to use the testing process to improve its safeguards.

The rollback does not mean Meta has abandoned Muse’s phone-calling feature. The company is continuing to work on improving the AI’s ability to complete calls without human help.

Muse’s Privacy Protections Face Questions Over Human Access

The human-concierge controversy is especially significant because Meta made privacy and security major parts of Muse’s launch. Meta says Muse operates inside a dedicated Muse Secure VM, a virtual computer environment intended to separate the AI agent and user data from other systems.

The company also says Muse has a separate Sentinel agent that controls its internet access. Muse cannot directly access passwords or payment information stored in secure systems. Users are also asked to approve sensitive actions, such as sending an email or making a purchase.

Muse provides an audit trail that allows users to see what the agent has done. Users can also disconnect services or ask Muse to forget information. Meta has said it plans to introduce Muse Confidential VM later in 2026. The company says this system will encrypt a user’s virtual machine, including data and conversations, with a key controlled only by the user.

However, the human-concierge test raises a separate privacy issue. Technical security measures can protect information inside an AI system, but they cannot by themselves prevent exposure when a human worker is brought into the process.

Meta Expands Its Personal AI Plans With Muse

Meta launched Muse on September 8 as its first personal AI agent intended for broad consumer use. The system runs on Muse Spark, which Meta describes as its most capable model for real-world agent tasks.

Muse can use a browser, fill out forms, work in the background and return to a task when something changes or when it needs the user’s approval.

The agent can also remember information that users have shared and use it in later tasks. For example, Meta says Muse could turn a recipe saved on Instagram into a grocery list while remembering a user’s dietary restrictions when helping plan a dinner.

This makes Muse different from AI tools that mainly generate text or answer questions. Meta wants Muse to have enough access to services and websites to carry out tasks on behalf of users.

That wider access also creates additional privacy and security concerns because the agent may interact with businesses, websites and people outside Meta’s platforms.

Muse Crosses 2.5 Million Downloads in Two Weeks

The human-concierge controversy comes soon after Muse’s launch, as the app has attracted significant early interest. According to Sensor Tower data cited by Reuters, Muse passed 2.5 million downloads within its first two weeks and reached the top of the U.S. app charts.

The early adoption gives Meta a large user base for testing its personal AI strategy. It also means that questions about transparency, privacy and human involvement could become increasingly important as the company expands Muse.

Anthropic and medical knowledge platform OpenEvidence are partnering to make AI-based clinical decision support available to doctors in around 100 countries. The initiative focuses on low- and middle-income countries, where doctors may have limited access to medical research, treatment guidelines and specialist expertise.

The companies announced the partnership on September 22, 2026. As part of the initiative, healthcare professionals in dozens of low- and middle-income countries will receive free access to a specialized version of OpenEvidence.

OpenEvidence uses medical research, clinical guidelines and other trusted sources to help doctors answer clinical questions and make informed decisions about patient care. The platform is already available at no cost to clinicians in the United States and Europe.

The global rollout will include countries such as Uganda, Angola, Sudan, Haiti and Mongolia, according to a list released by OpenEvidence. Anthropic and OpenEvidence said the platform will be adapted to the healthcare needs and conditions of different countries rather than using the same approach everywhere.

Anthropic Will Provide the AI Technology

Under the partnership, Anthropic will provide the underlying AI technology, while OpenEvidence will adapt its platform for use in different countries and healthcare systems.

The companies say medical AI cannot be deployed in the same way everywhere. Differences in local disease patterns, healthcare infrastructure, diagnostic tools and available treatments need to be considered when bringing the technology to countries with fewer healthcare resources.

OpenEvidence founder Daniel Nadler said access to medical knowledge should not depend on where a doctor or patient lives. The companies have not disclosed the financial details of the partnership.

OpenEvidence Uses Medical Research to Answer Doctors’ Questions

OpenEvidence is a medical knowledge platform that helps doctors find answers to clinical questions using peer-reviewed research, medical literature and treatment guidelines. The platform is already used by healthcare professionals in the U.S. and Europe. Nadler said U.S. clinicians used OpenEvidence 42 million times in August 2026 alone.

He also said doctors who used OpenEvidence will have treated several hundred million Americans during 2026. These figures were provided by OpenEvidence and have not been independently verified.

The platform draws on research and information from major medical organizations and publications. OpenEvidence lists collaborations involving The New England Journal of Medicine, JAMA and the JAMA Network, the National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Nature, Cochrane and several medical societies.

The Partnership Will Reach About 100 Countries

The partnership is expected to expand OpenEvidence’s access to about 100 countries, with a particular focus on regions where doctors may have less access to medical journals, specialist expertise and continuing medical education. Countries included in the initial rollout include:

• Uganda
• Angola
• Sudan
• Haiti
• Mongolia

The goal is to give doctors easier access to reliable medical information, including in healthcare systems with limited resources.

Smartphones could also help make the service more accessible. Nadler said that even in areas where healthcare facilities may not have reliable electricity, many doctors still have smartphones that can be used to access medical information.

OpenEvidence Is Adapting the System to Local Healthcare

A key part of the partnership is adapting the platform to local healthcare systems. Medical conditions, available treatments and healthcare resources can vary widely between countries. A medical AI system built mainly around data and practices from wealthier countries may not fully account for local disease patterns, diagnostic tools or treatments available to patients.

OpenEvidence is already working with healthcare organizations in Rwanda and Botswana to adapt its tools to local needs. OpenEvidence founder Daniel Nadler said the systems being developed for these regions are intended to adjust to the local healthcare context.

This is important because simply translating a medical AI tool into another language does not make it suitable for a different healthcare system. Doctors may have access to different diagnostic tests, medicines and treatment options, while hospitals may also operate with different levels of infrastructure and resources.

The Partnership Aims to Address Gaps in Medical Knowledge

Many low and middle-income countries face shortages of doctors and medical specialists. Healthcare professionals may also have limited access to medical journals, research papers and specialist expertise.

AI-based clinical tools are being explored as a way to help doctors find and review large amounts of medical information more quickly. The Anthropic and OpenEvidence partnership aims to address some of these gaps by providing a specialized medical AI service at no cost in countries where access to medical resources can be more limited.

Dr. Ahmed Bendary, a cardiologist at Benha University in Egypt, told Reuters that bringing evidence-based clinical tools to countries outside the U.S. and Europe could be useful in areas where hospitals have limited access to major medical journals.

Medical AI Still Needs to Account for Local Conditions

The global rollout also highlights a key issue in healthcare AI: medical tools need to work within the conditions of the healthcare systems where they are used.

AI models trained mainly on information from wealthier countries may not fully reflect conditions in lower-income regions. Differences can include disease rates, diagnostic equipment, available medicines, treatment options and clinical practices.

OpenEvidence’s work in Rwanda and Botswana is part of its effort to address these differences. Instead of treating healthcare systems around the world as the same, the company is adapting its platform to local conditions.

The system is also intended to serve as a clinical decision-support tool, not a replacement for doctors. It is designed to help clinicians find and assess medical information while they make decisions about patient care.

Anthropic Is Expanding Its Healthcare and Life Sciences Work

The partnership comes as Anthropic expands its work in healthcare and life sciences. In September 2026, the company introduced its Life Sciences Verification Program, which gives approved life-science professionals access to certain Anthropic models with safeguards designed for biological research. 

The program covers areas such as drug discovery, research biology, clinical development and manufacturing. Anthropic has also been expanding its work in biology and drug research. These efforts show the company’s broader interest in using its AI models for scientific and healthcare applications.

The OpenEvidence partnership extends that work into clinical decision support, while also expanding access to medical AI beyond the major markets where these tools are already widely available.

ALSO READ: Anthropic Blocks Five Cases of AI Misuse Linked to Biological Weapons

How Anthropic and OpenEvidence Could Expand Global Healthcare Access

The partnership could help make medical research and clinical information more accessible to doctors in countries where healthcare resources are limited.

The initiative does not solve larger healthcare problems such as shortages of doctors, medicines, diagnostic equipment or reliable electricity. However, it could address one specific challenge: limited access to medical knowledge.

By giving clinicians free access to a medical AI platform, the companies aim to make it easier for doctors to find research, treatment guidelines and other medical information while caring for patients.

The partnership also shows that expanding medical AI requires more than making an AI model available. Reliable medical evidence, local adaptation, clinical oversight and accuracy will all be important for these tools to work effectively in different healthcare systems.

For Anthropic and OpenEvidence, the next step will be testing how well the platform performs across different regions and healthcare settings while maintaining the reliability expected from a clinical decision-support tool.

OpenAI has expanded its GPT-6 model family with GPT-6 Sol and GPT-6 Luna, two new models designed to make advanced AI more affordable to use at a large scale. The models were released on September 22, shortly after OpenAI introduced GPT-6 Astra, its main model for complex reasoning and coding.

OpenAI says Sol and Luna improve factual accuracy, coding, computer use, professional tasks and AI agents. The company also says the models cost much less to run than earlier systems. OpenAI credits the lower cost to improvements in caching and the way the models process information.

ALSO READ: OpenAI Reveals 6 Alarming AI Model Behaviors in New Safety Reports

GPT-6 Sol and Luna Are Built for Different AI Tasks

OpenAI is targeting GPT-6 Sol and GPT-6 Luna at different types of AI tasks.

GPT-6 Sol is built for more demanding work, especially complex coding and AI agent tasks. OpenAI says Sol offers a balance between performance and cost. This makes it useful for developers who need strong reasoning but do not want to use the company’s most expensive model.

GPT-6 Luna is designed for focused tasks that need to be handled at high volume. It puts more emphasis on keeping costs low and is described by OpenAI as its most efficient model for these workloads.

Both models have a 1.05 million-token context window and can generate up to 128,000 output tokens. They support text and image inputs and are available through OpenAI’s Responses and Chat Completions APIs.

OpenAI Lowers API Prices With GPT-6 Sol and Luna

OpenAI has also focused on making its new GPT-6 models cheaper to use. The company says GPT-6 Sol and GPT-6 Luna are 50% cheaper than the promotional prices of their GPT-5.6 counterparts. The standard API pricing for the two models is:

Model	Input per 1M tokens	Cached input	Output per 1M tokens
GPT-5.6 Sol	$4	–	$20
GPT-6 Sol	$2	$0.20	$10
GPT-5.6 Luna	$0.20	–	$1.20
GPT-6 Luna	$0.10	$0.01	$0.50

These prices apply to standard API use for prompts with up to 272,000 input tokens. OpenAI also has different pricing options for longer prompts, batch processing and other types of API use.

OpenAI says improvements to its caching system have helped reduce costs. The company has increased the default cache-hit rate and offers discounts when eligible shared parts of a prompt are reused within a 30-minute period.

GPT-6 Sol Delivers Fewer Errors in OpenAI Tests

OpenAI says the new models also improve factual accuracy. The company tested GPT-6 Sol using de-identified real-world conversations where users had previously reported errors. In this test, OpenAI says GPT-6 Sol made about half as many mistakes as its predecessor. 

Its performance also came close to the more expensive GPT-6 Astra. GPT-6 Luna also performed better than GPT-5.6 Luna when tested with higher reasoning settings. However, these results come from OpenAI’s own evaluation. They show the company’s reported performance and have not been independently verified.

Sol Targets Coding and AI Agents

GPT-6 Sol is created for developers building coding agents and AI systems that can handle multi-step tasks.

OpenAI says Sol performs much better than GPT-5.6 Sol on FrontierCode, a benchmark that tests whether AI coding agents can make changes that are ready to be added to real software projects. The test looks at more than whether the code works. It also checks testing, coding style, the size of the changes and whether the code follows the existing project’s standards.

OpenAI also reports improvements on AutomationBench, which tests AI agents on complete business tasks using 47 tools across areas such as sales, marketing, operations, customer support, finance and HR.

At its highest reasoning setting, OpenAI says GPT-6 Sol performed better than Claude Opus 5 on the benchmark while costing much less per task. GPT-6 Luna also performed better than its previous version while reducing the cost of completing the benchmark tasks.

ALSO READ: OpenAI Under Senate Probe After AI Agents Breach Hugging Face Systems

GPT-6 Models Improve Computer-Use Performance

The new GPT-6 models also show improvements in tasks that require AI to interact with computer interfaces. On the OSWorld 2.0 offline benchmark, OpenAI says GPT-6 Sol scored 60.5% at its highest reasoning setting. 

Claude Opus 5 scored 60.3% at medium effort in the same comparison. OpenAI says Sol achieved its result at about 80% lower cost per task. GPT-6 Luna also performed better than GPT-5.6 Sol at a lower reasoning setting, while costing about one-tenth as much in OpenAI’s comparison.

OpenAI continues to position GPT-6 Astra as its strongest model for computer-use tasks, while Sol and Luna are aimed at users who want lower-cost options.

GPT-6 Models Aim for Clearer and More Precise Responses

OpenAI says GPT-6 Sol and Luna also improve the way they communicate with users. The company says the models give shorter and more focused responses, with less jargon, fewer unnecessary details and fewer unusual phrases. The aim is to keep the important information while making technical and coding discussions easier to follow.

OpenAI also reports improvements in its alignment tests, including evaluations that check how models respond to misleading claims about work they have completed. However, the company says these tests are designed to create challenging situations and should not be treated as estimates of how often these problems occur in normal use.

GPT-6 Sol and Luna Give Developers More Model Choices

The release gives developers more options when choosing an OpenAI model for different types of work. OpenAI positions GPT-6 Astra for the most demanding reasoning and coding tasks, GPT-6 Sol for workloads that need a balance between performance and cost, and GPT-6 Luna for high-volume tasks where keeping costs low is a priority.

The lower token prices could help businesses reduce the cost of running AI agents, coding tools and large-scale text-processing systems. This could be particularly useful for AI agents, which may need multiple model calls to complete a single task.

The launch also shows OpenAI’s focus on making AI more affordable to run at scale. By offering models at different performance and price levels, OpenAI gives developers more flexibility to choose a model based on the complexity and volume of their workloads.

California is tightening its rules for AI companion chatbots as concerns grow about how children and teenagers use systems designed to provide friendship, emotional support and ongoing conversations.

California became the first U.S. state to create specific safety rules for AI companion chatbots aimed at protecting children. In October 2025, Governor Gavin Newsom signed SB 243, which introduced rules on safety disclosures, responses to self-harm messages, break reminders and sexually explicit content for minors. The law took effect in 2026.

California added more requirements on September 10, 2026, when Newsom signed SB 1119, also known as Adam’s Law. The new law requires features such as parental controls, alerts when children turn off certain safety settings, crisis-response measures and independent child-safety audits. It also requires companies to carry out annual risk assessments for companion chatbots used by children.

These laws show the growing focus on a key difference between companion AI and regular chatbots. Companion systems are designed to keep users engaged in ongoing conversations and can develop a sense of friendship, support or relationship over time.

What Counts as an AI Companion Chatbot in California

California’s rules treat AI companion chatbots differently from regular question-and-answer chatbots. The state’s definition covers AI systems that have ongoing conversations with users and are designed to create a sense of friendship, companionship or another type of social relationship. 

This can include chatbots presented as virtual friends, companions or relationship-based characters. This difference is important because companion chatbots can remember past conversations and use personal information to make future interactions feel more continuous and personal.

Because of this, California’s rules look beyond the accuracy of individual responses. They also focus on how companion chatbots interact with young users and how they handle conversations involving self-harm, sexual content or other potentially dangerous situations.

California’s First Major Companion Chatbot Law Took Effect in 2026

California’s first major law focused specifically on AI companion chatbots was SB 243, which Governor Gavin Newsom signed on October 13, 2025. The law introduced several safety requirements for platforms that offer AI companions. It took effect in 2026.

For children and teenagers, the law requires platforms to clearly tell users that they are talking to AI and not a real person. Chatbots must also give regular reminders that the system is artificial and encourage young users to take breaks. The law also sets limits on sexual content. AI companion chatbots cannot generate sexually explicit images for minors.

Another key part of SB 243 focuses on self-harm and suicide-related conversations. Platforms must have procedures for identifying and responding to messages that indicate suicidal thoughts or self-harm. 

Companies must also provide information about these safety procedures and certain crisis-related notifications to California’s Department of Public Health. The law also prevents AI companion chatbots from claiming to be health-care professionals. Key requirements under SB 243: 

• AI disclosure: Minors must be told that they are interacting with an AI system.
• Break reminders: Chatbots must regularly remind young users to take breaks.
• Self-harm protocols: Platforms must have procedures for handling conversations about suicide and self-harm.
• Crisis information: Companies must report certain crisis-related information to California health authorities.
• Sexual content: Chatbots cannot generate sexually explicit images for minors.
• Professional identity: AI systems cannot present themselves as health-care professionals.

These requirements created the initial safety framework for AI companion chatbots in California. The state later added further protections through new legislation in 2026.

ALSO READ: AI Safety Concerns Escalate as Researchers Push OpenAI and Anthropic to Slow Down

California Introduces New Safeguards for Child AI Companion Users

California added more safety requirements for AI companion chatbots through SB 1119, signed by Governor Gavin Newsom on September 10, 2026. Known as Adam’s Law, the legislation strengthens protections for children who use AI companion chatbots. 

According to the governor’s office, the law requires companies to have crisis procedures for conversations involving suicidal thoughts, provide parental controls and notify parents when a child turns off certain safety settings.

The law also introduces independent child-safety audits and annual risk assessments for companion chatbot systems. These requirements go beyond dealing with harmful conversations after they happen.

They also require companies to regularly examine the risks their systems may pose to children and check whether their safety measures are working. California says SB 1119 is the first law in the U.S. to require independent child-safety audits and annual risk assessments for AI companion chatbots.

How California’s New Rules Protect Children Using AI

The new laws are important because California treats AI companion chatbots differently from regular software and general-purpose AI tools. A search engine, productivity chatbot or general AI system is often used to complete a specific task. An AI companion, on the other hand, is designed to keep interacting with the user over time.

These interactions can include repeated conversations, personalized replies and ongoing communication based on previous chats. California’s rules cover several parts of these interactions, including:

• AI awareness: Children should know that they are talking to an AI system.
• Break reminders: Young users should receive reminders to take breaks.
• Self-harm responses: Platforms must have procedures for conversations involving suicidal thoughts or self-harm.
• Parental controls: Parents must have certain controls over the service.
• Safety settings: Parents may be notified when a child turns off certain safety features.
• Risk assessments: Companies must regularly assess potential risks linked to their AI companion systems.
• Independent audits: Outside experts must review certain child-safety measures.

The laws do not say that all AI companions cause emotional dependency or psychological harm. Instead, they require companies to put specific safety measures in place to address risks identified by lawmakers.

Self-harm Is A Key Focus of California’s AI rules

Self-harm and suicide-related conversations are a major part of California’s rules for AI companion chatbots. Under SB 243, companion chatbot companies must have procedures to identify and respond when users talk about suicidal thoughts or self-harm. 

The 2026 law adds further protections for children in these situations. The focus comes as concerns grow about people turning to AI chatbots when they are experiencing emotional distress.

California’s rules also make clear that an AI companion should not act as a replacement for a doctor, therapist or other health professional. SB 243 prohibits companion chatbots from presenting themselves as health-care professionals. This is especially important when children or teenagers use AI companions for emotional support.

Parental Controls Become Part of Companion AI Regulation

Adam’s Law also adds a stronger role for parents. The law requires companion-chatbot services to provide parental controls and notify parents if a child disables certain safety settings.

This represents a broader approach to child safety than simply filtering individual chatbot responses. Instead of relying entirely on the AI system to determine whether a conversation is safe, California is also giving parents tools to oversee aspects of a child’s interaction with companion AI.

For companies, this could mean changes to account systems, age-related controls, safety settings and notification mechanisms.

AI Companion Companies Face Independent Safety Audits

Independent audits are another important part of California’s new rules. Under Adam’s Law, companies must carry out independent child-safety audits and annual risk assessments for AI companion chatbots.

This means companies may have to do more than test their own systems. Outside reviewers will also examine whether the safety measures for children are working as required. Independent reviews can provide an additional check on how companies identify and address risks in their AI companion systems.

California is also developing broader systems for independent AI testing and auditing. This shows that third-party reviews are becoming a larger part of the state’s approach to AI oversight.

Why California Is Paying More Attention to AI Companions

AI companion apps are different from many other AI products because they are built around ongoing social interaction. A companion chatbot may be presented as a friend, confidant, romantic partner or fictional character. 

It can have repeated conversations with users and, in some cases, remember details from earlier chats. These features have led researchers to study issues such as emotional attachment, dependence and how users may view AI companions as social relationships.

California’s laws focus on these types of interactions, particularly when children use companion chatbots. The rules require companies to add safeguards for situations such as self-harm conversations, sexual content and the disabling of safety settings.

The laws do not say that AI companions are inherently harmful or that they always cause emotional or psychological problems. Instead, they focus on specific risks that may arise from the way these systems interact with young users.

California’s Rules Are Part of A Wider U.S. Debate

California is not the only state looking at AI chatbot safety. Lawmakers in other U.S. states have also proposed rules related to AI chatbots, children and mental-health risks. However, California has taken a specific approach by creating rules for AI systems designed to maintain ongoing social or relationship-like interactions.

The governor’s office says California’s 2025 law created the first dedicated child-safety framework for AI companion chatbots. The legislation passed in September 2026 then added more protections. Together, the rules cover several areas, including:

• AI disclosure
• Crisis-response procedures
• Parental controls
• Content restrictions
• Risk assessments
• Independent safety audits

How California’s AI Companion Rules Are Expanding

California’s rules for AI companion chatbots have expanded from basic safety requirements to broader checks on how these systems are designed and operated. The first law, SB 243, focused on measures such as telling users they are talking to AI, providing break reminders, responding to crisis situations and restricting sexually explicit content for minors.

The newer SB 1119 adds more requirements, including parental controls, notifications when children turn off certain safety settings, independent safety audits and regular risk assessments. This means California’s rules are looking beyond individual chatbot responses. 

They also focus on how companion systems are designed, what safety measures they include and how companies check whether those measures work. As AI companion apps become more widely used, this broader approach could shape how companies develop and test these systems.

How California’s AI Companion Rules Could Shape Future Regulation

California’s new laws create a more specific set of safety rules for AI companion chatbots, especially those used by children. The impact of these rules will depend on how companies implement them and how regulators enforce them. 

Over time, this could provide more information about whether measures such as AI disclosures, crisis procedures, parental controls, risk assessments and independent audits work effectively. California’s approach could also give other policymakers a model to consider as they develop their own rules for AI companions. The state is regulating more than individual chatbot responses. Its rules also look at how these systems are designed, how they interact with children and what safety measures companies put in place.

The laws do not say that virtual relationships are always harmful. Instead, they focus on specific risks linked to AI companion chatbots, including self-harm conversations, inappropriate content and situations that may require greater parental oversight.

As more people use AI companions for friendship, emotional support or other ongoing interactions, these rules could become part of a wider discussion about how governments should regulate social AI.