Data stories

AI in numbers

Who builds AI models, who opens the weights, and what companies actually use. Each chart answers, in one line, what it means for your industry — with the source, licence and data date right under it.

Data as of · 2026 is year-to-date through that day and is drawn hatched or hollow.

Story 1 · Countries

The US still makes the most notable models; China's share has grown

Of the 107 notable AI models Epoch lists for 2025, 64 came from US organisations and 35 from Chinese ones.

China's share of notable AI models rose from 19.3% in 2023 to 32.7% in 2025; the US still leads at 59.8%.

  • United States
  • China
  • Hatched = 2026, partial year
0%25%50%75%100%US 2023: 72.3% (86/119)72%China 2023: 19.3% (23/119)19%2023n = 119US 2024: 58.2% (57/98)58%China 2024: 31.6% (31/98)32%2024n = 98US 2025: 59.8% (64/107)60%China 2025: 32.7% (35/107)33%2025n = 107US 2026 YTD: 58.3% (49/84)58%China 2026 YTD: 34.5% (29/84)35%2026 YTDn = 84
Source: Epoch AI, Data on AI modelsLicence: CC BY 4.0Data date: Chart: Mate in the Loop

US 72.3% → 59.8%, China 19.3% → 32.7% (34.5% so far in 2026). A model from several countries counts once for each, so shares can add up to more than 100%.

Show the data table
China's share of notable AI models rose from 19.3% in 2023 to 32.7% in 2025; the US still leads at 59.8%.
YearNotable models (all)USChinaSouth Korea
202311986 (72.3%)23 (19.3%)2
20249857 (58.2%)31 (31.6%)1
202510764 (59.8%)35 (32.7%)8
2026 YTD8449 (58.3%)29 (34.5%)5

File: knowledge/data/derived/notable_models_by_country_year.csv

What it means for your industry

Frontier models mostly come from US and Chinese organisations. A shipping or manufacturing company choosing a model is in practice choosing between two ecosystems whose regulation differs (export controls, data residency). That is a procurement question before it is a technical one.

  • Epoch's list is a curation, not a census. The country is the developer organisation's, not where the people work.
  • The AI Index 2026 (April 2026) counted 59 US, 35 China and 8 South Korea out of 102 for 2025 (PDF p.15, p.21). Epoch has added models since the report's cut-off, so this page shows Epoch's live figure with its date. Stanford HAI, AI Index 2026 (CC BY-ND 4.0 — quoted, not redrawn)

Story 2 · Open weights

The open frontier is Chinese

China releases most of its notable models with open weights, and the US increasingly does not. On the download side, models built on Chinese bases lead too.

In 2025, 28 of China's 35 notable models had open weights; in the US it was 11 of 64.

  • US — open weights
  • China — open weights
  • Not open weights
  • * 2026 = partial year (hatched)
0255075100United StatesUnited States 2023: open weights 37United States 2023: not open 4937/862023United States 2024: open weights 20United States 2024: not open 3720/572024United States 2025: open weights 11United States 2025: not open 5311/642025United States 2026 YTD: open weights 4United States 2026 YTD: not open 454/492026*ChinaChina 2023: open weights 13China 2023: not open 1013/232023China 2024: open weights 16China 2024: not open 1516/312024China 2025: open weights 28China 2025: not open 728/352025China 2026 YTD: open weights 20China 2026 YTD: not open 920/292026*
Source: Epoch AI, Data on AI modelsLicence: CC BY 4.0Data date: Chart: Mate in the Loop

Share of US notable models with open weights: 43% in 2023 → 17.2% in 2025. Both panels share one y-scale.

Show the data table
In 2025, 28 of China's 35 notable models had open weights; in the US it was 11 of 64.
YearChina: open / allUS: open / all
202313 / 23 (56.5%)37 / 86 (43%)
202416 / 31 (51.6%)20 / 57 (35.1%)
202528 / 35 (80%)11 / 64 (17.2%)
2026 YTD20 / 29 (69%)4 / 49 (8.2%)

File: knowledge/data/derived/open_weight_notable_by_country_year.csv

Models built on Chinese base models took 54.4% of downloads among Hugging Face's top 1,000 text models; Qwen alone took 42.29%.

  • China 54.4%
  • US 26.3%
  • Other countries 1.4%
  • Not mapped 18%
China: 54.4%China 54.4%US: 26.3%US 26.3%Other countries: 1.4%Not mapped: 18%Not mapped 18%0%25%50%75%100%
Source: Hugging Face Hub API — top 1,000 text-generation models (aggregates only)Licence: Hugging Face Terms of Service · aggregates onlyData date: Chart: Mate in the Loop

“Downloads” are config-file requests over 30 days, so CI pipelines count; they are not users. Origin follows one base_model hop, and the 18% we could not map is shown on its own. This is not a count of deployments in industry.

Show the data table
Models built on Chinese base models took 54.4% of downloads among Hugging Face's top 1,000 text models; Qwen alone took 42.29%.
Base-model origin30-day downloadsShareModels in top 1,000
China210,640,30554.4%402
United States of America101,722,70826.3%272
(origin not mapped)69,719,79618%299
France3,766,1851%21
South Korea974,4570.3%5
Japan380,7970.1%1

File: knowledge/data/derived/hf_downloads_by_origin_country.csv, hf_downloads_by_origin_org.csv

What it means for your industry

On-premise and edge deployments use open weights — factories with air-gapped OT networks, ships with limited bandwidth, utility control rooms. For an operator, the weights' country of origin becomes a supply-chain question: who trained it, on what, and under which licence.

  • The author-to-organisation map is hand-kept, so the unmapped share is always shown. Some of the download volume is Hugging Face's own CI test fixtures.

Story 3 · The gap

Has the open-weight gap closed? It depends on the ruler

Two rulers give two answers to the same question. We show both, side by side, on one shared time axis.

On Epoch's benchmark index (ECI), the closed–open gap narrowed to 1.2 points in Jul 2024 and is back to 11.0 in Oct 2026.

  • Shaded = under ~4 pts, within the 90% CI (noise)
051015202023202420252026Jul 2024: 1.23 — Claude 3.5 Sonnet 130 vs Llama 3.1-405B 128.77Oct 2026: 10.97 — Claude Opus 5.5 168.83 vs Kimi K3 157.86Llama 3.1-405B 1.2Jan 2025: 2.9 — o1 141.72 vs DeepSeek-R1 138.82DeepSeek-R1 2.911.0
Source: Epoch AI, Epoch Capabilities IndexLicence: CC BY 4.0Data date: Chart: Mate in the Loop

The gap between the best scores among models released up to each month. ECI has no meaningful zero, so we plot the gap, from zero, not the levels.

Show the data table
On Epoch's benchmark index (ECI), the closed–open gap narrowed to 1.2 points in Jul 2024 and is back to 11.0 in Oct 2026.
MonthBest closed (ECI)Best open (ECI)Gap (pts)
2023-03GPT-4 (Mar 2023) 125.74LLaMA-65B 109.9715.77
2023-04GPT-4 (Mar 2023) 125.74LLaMA-65B 109.9715.77
2023-05GPT-4 (Mar 2023) 125.74LLaMA-65B 109.9715.77
2023-06GPT-4 (Mar 2023) 125.74LLaMA-65B 109.9715.77
2023-07GPT-4 (Mar 2023) 125.74Stable Beluga 2 117.028.72
2023-08GPT-4 (Mar 2023) 125.74Stable Beluga 2 117.028.72
2023-09GPT-4 (Mar 2023) 125.74Stable Beluga 2 117.028.72
2023-10GPT-4 (Mar 2023) 125.74Stable Beluga 2 117.028.72
2023-11GPT-4 (Mar 2023) 125.74Yi-34B 117.338.41
2023-12GPT-4 (Mar 2023) 125.74Mixtral 8x7B 118.447.3
2024-01GPT-4 Turbo (Nov 2023) 126.43Mixtral 8x7B 118.447.99
2024-02Claude 3 Opus 126.9Mixtral 8x7B 118.448.46
2024-03Claude 3 Opus 126.9Mixtral 8x7B 118.448.46
2024-04GPT-4 Turbo (Apr 2024) 127.27Llama 3-70B 123.014.26
2024-05GPT-4o (May 2024) 128.99DeepSeek-V2 (MoE-236B, May 2024) 124.84.19
2024-06Claude 3.5 Sonnet 130Qwen2-72B 125.284.72
2024-07Claude 3.5 Sonnet 130Llama 3.1-405B 128.771.23
2024-08Claude 3.5 Sonnet 130Llama 3.1-405B 128.771.23
2024-09o1-mini 135.7Qwen2.5-72B 128.976.73
2024-10o1-mini 135.7Qwen2.5-72B 128.976.73
2024-11o1-mini 135.7Qwen2.5-72B 128.976.73
2024-12o1 141.72DeepSeek-V3 132.39.42
2025-01o1 141.72DeepSeek-R1 138.822.9
2025-02o1 141.72DeepSeek-R1 138.822.9
2025-03Gemini 2.5 Pro (Mar 2025) 143.96DeepSeek-R1 138.825.14
2025-04o3 146.73Qwen3-235B-A22B 139.157.58
2025-05o3 146.73DeepSeek-R1 (May 2025) 141.135.6
2025-06o3-pro 147.33DeepSeek-R1 (May 2025) 141.136.2
2025-07o3-pro 147.33Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking (Jul 2025) 143.763.57
2025-08GPT-5 150Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking (Jul 2025) 143.766.24
2025-09GPT-5 150DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp 144.915.09
2025-10GPT-5 Pro 150.59DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp 144.915.68
2025-11Gemini 3 Pro 153.07Kimi K2 Thinking 145.827.25
2025-12GPT-5.2 Pro 156.33DeepSeek-V3.2 146.0910.24
2026-01GPT-5.2 Pro 156.33Kimi K2.5 148.078.26
2026-02GPT-5.3 Codex 157.09Kimi K2.5 148.079.02
2026-03GPT-5.4 Pro 159.57Kimi K2.5 148.0711.5
2026-04GPT-5.5 Pro 162.91Kimi K2.6 150.9411.97
2026-05GPT-5.5 Pro 162.91Kimi K2.6 150.9411.97
2026-06Claude Fable 5 163.42GLM-5.2 151.9411.48
2026-07Claude Opus 5 163.94Kimi K3 157.866.08
2026-08Claude Opus 5 163.94Kimi K3 157.866.08
2026-09Claude Opus 5.5 168.83Kimi K3 157.8610.97
2026-10Claude Opus 5.5 168.83Kimi K3 157.8610.97

File: knowledge/data/derived/eci_best_closed_vs_open_monthly.csv

On human-preference votes (Arena, style-controlled) the best open model trails the best closed one by 2.0% (Oct 22, 2026).

0%2%4%6%8%20232024202520262025-02-06: 0.21% — o1-2024-12-17 vs deepseek-r12026-10-22: 2% — Gemini 4 Argon (High) vs Kimi K3 (Max)narrowest: deepseek-r1 0.21%2.0%
Source: Arena (lmarena-ai), Arena Leaderboard DatasetLicence: CC BY 4.0Data date: Chart: Mate in the Loop

Only snapshots that contain OpenAI, Anthropic and Google models are computed. “Open” means any licence other than Proprietary, including non-commercial and custom licences.

Show the data table
On human-preference votes (Arena, style-controlled) the best open model trails the best closed one by 2.0% (Oct 22, 2026).
SnapshotTop closedTop openGap (% of open)
2024-08-28chatgpt-4o-latest 1288.8llama-3.1-405b-instruct 1249.73.13%
2024-09-04chatgpt-4o-latest 1288.7llama-3.1-405b-instruct 12503.09%
2024-09-15gpt-4o-2024-05-13 1261.6llama-3.1-405b-instruct-bf16 1250.90.86%
2024-09-17o1-preview 1325.7llama-3.1-405b-instruct-fp8 1249.86.07%
2024-09-27o1-preview 1308.7llama-3.1-405b-instruct-bf16 1253.54.4%
2024-10-07o1-preview 1300.2llama-3.1-405b-instruct-bf16 1252.23.83%
2024-10-15o1-preview 1300.5llama-3.1-405b-instruct-fp8 1251.73.9%
2024-10-23o1-preview 1302.9llama-3.1-405b-instruct-fp8 1251.44.11%
2024-10-28o1-preview 1301.6llama-3.1-405b-instruct-fp8 1251.54.01%
2024-11-04o1-preview 1300.5llama-3.1-405b-instruct-fp8 1252.23.85%
2024-11-12o1-preview 1300.1llama-3.1-405b-instruct-fp8 1252.43.81%
2024-11-13o1-preview 1299.7llama-3.1-405b-instruct-fp8 1252.53.77%
2024-11-20o1-preview 1300.6llama-3.1-405b-instruct-fp8 1252.33.86%
2024-11-21o1-preview 1300.5llama-3.1-405b-instruct-fp8 1252.23.86%
2024-11-22o1-preview 1300.5llama-3.1-405b-instruct-fp8 1252.23.86%
2024-12-01o1-preview 1301.5llama-3.1-405b-instruct-fp8 1252.73.89%
2024-12-05o1-preview 1301.9llama-3.1-405b-instruct-fp8 1252.43.95%
2024-12-10o1-preview 1301.7llama-3.1-405b-instruct-fp8 1252.23.95%
2024-12-15o1-preview 1301.8llama-3.1-405b-instruct-fp8 1252.33.95%
2024-12-18o1-preview 1302.4llama-3.1-405b-instruct-fp8 1252.34%
2024-12-22o1-preview 1302.6llama-3.1-405b-instruct-fp8 1252.44%
2024-12-30o1-2024-12-17 1327.9deepseek-v3 1274.24.22%
2025-01-05o1-2024-12-17 1322.8deepseek-v3 1277.53.55%
2025-01-15o1-2024-12-17 1321.6deepseek-v3 1278.63.36%
2025-01-19o1-2024-12-17 1323deepseek-v3 1278.93.45%
2025-01-21o1-2024-12-17 1322.5deepseek-v3 1278.73.42%
2025-01-22o1-2024-12-17 1322.5deepseek-v3 1278.73.42%
2025-01-24o1-2024-12-17 1322.9deepseek-r1 1316.20.51%
2025-01-28o1-2024-12-17 1322.3deepseek-r1 1316.10.47%
2025-02-03o1-2024-12-17 1322.6deepseek-r1 13190.27%
2025-02-05o1-2024-12-17 1322.8deepseek-r1 1319.70.23%
2025-02-06o1-2024-12-17 1322.6deepseek-r1 1319.80.21%
2025-02-09o1-2024-12-17 1322deepseek-r1 1319.20.22%
2025-02-11o1-2024-12-17 1323.1deepseek-r1 1319.80.25%
2025-02-14o1-2024-12-17 1322.7deepseek-r1 1319.70.23%
2025-02-17o1-2024-12-17 1323.5deepseek-r1 13200.26%
2025-02-21o1-2024-12-17 1322.2deepseek-r1 1319.50.21%
2025-02-27o1-2024-12-17 1323deepseek-r1 1320.30.21%
2025-03-03gpt-4.5-preview-2025-02-27 1369.8deepseek-r1 1320.33.75%
2025-03-11gpt-4.5-preview-2025-02-27 1362.3deepseek-r1 1318.13.35%
2025-03-15gpt-4.5-preview-2025-02-27 1358.4deepseek-r1 1316.73.16%
2025-03-17gpt-4.5-preview-2025-02-27 1357.9deepseek-r1 1316.83.12%
2025-03-20gpt-4.5-preview-2025-02-27 1356.8deepseek-r1 1317.13.01%
2025-03-25gpt-4.5-preview-2025-02-27 1356.4deepseek-r1 1316.43.04%
2025-03-26chatgpt-4o-latest-20250326 1358.8deepseek-r1 1316.53.21%
2025-03-30chatgpt-4o-latest-20250326 1358.8deepseek-v3-0324 1319.23%
2025-04-05chatgpt-4o-latest-20250326 1362.5deepseek-v3-0324 1319.23.29%
2025-04-08chatgpt-4o-latest-20250326 1362.5deepseek-v3-0324 1319.23.29%
2025-04-09chatgpt-4o-latest-20250326 1359.5deepseek-v3-0324 1320.62.95%
2025-04-16chatgpt-4o-latest-20250326 1359.8deepseek-v3-0324 1321.82.87%
2025-04-23o3-2025-04-16 1380.3deepseek-v3-0324 1323.14.32%
2025-05-05o3-2025-04-16 1372.8deepseek-v3-0324 1322.13.84%
2025-05-06o3-2025-04-16 1373.3deepseek-v3-0324 13233.8%
2025-05-11o3-2025-04-16 1375.2deepseek-v3-0324 1323.33.92%
2025-05-19o3-2025-04-16 1434.4deepseek-v3-0324 1382.43.77%
2025-05-20o3-2025-04-16 1434.4deepseek-v3-0324 1382.43.77%
2025-05-22o3-2025-04-16 1435.2deepseek-v3-0324 13823.85%
2025-06-01o3-2025-04-16 1441.8deepseek-v3-0324 1385.54.06%
2025-06-03o3-2025-04-16 1441.4deepseek-v3-0324 1385.84.01%
2025-06-05o3-2025-04-16 1442.8deepseek-v3-0324 1388.43.92%
2025-06-11o3-2025-04-16 1447.1deepseek-v3-0324 1393.53.85%
2025-06-17o3-2025-04-16 1448.9deepseek-r1-0528 1410.22.75%
2025-06-18o3-2025-04-16 1449.1deepseek-r1-0528 14112.7%
2025-06-24gemini-2.5-pro 1466.6deepseek-r1-0528 1412.83.81%
2025-07-01gemini-2.5-pro 1463.4deepseek-r1-0528 1412.73.59%
2025-07-07gemini-2.5-pro 1465.4deepseek-r1-0528 1414.13.63%
2025-07-15gemini-2.5-pro 1461.8deepseek-r1-0528 1414.43.35%
2025-07-17gemini-2.5-pro 1461.7kimi-k2-0711-preview 1419.82.95%
2025-07-25gemini-2.5-pro 1460.2kimi-k2-0711-preview 1418.12.97%
2025-07-28gemini-2.5-pro 1462.8kimi-k2-0711-preview 1419.83.03%
2025-08-01gemini-2.5-pro 1458.5qwen3-235b-a22b-instruct-2507 1432.91.78%
2025-08-04gemini-2.5-pro 1458.6qwen3-235b-a22b-instruct-2507 1429.52.04%
2025-08-07gpt-5-high 1481.4qwen3-235b-a22b-instruct-2507 1428.13.73%
2025-08-14gpt-5-high 1463.3qwen3-235b-a22b-instruct-2507 1426.22.6%
2025-08-18gpt-5-high 1460.7qwen3-235b-a22b-instruct-2507 1423.22.64%
2025-08-21gemini-2.5-pro 1457.1qwen3-235b-a22b-instruct-2507 1422.52.43%
2025-08-27gemini-2.5-pro 1456.4kimi-k2-0711-preview 1421.22.48%
2025-08-28gemini-2.5-pro 1455.9kimi-k2-0711-preview 1420.92.46%
2025-09-08gemini-2.5-pro 1455kimi-k2-0711-preview 1419.62.49%
2025-09-17gemini-2.5-pro 1456qwen3-235b-a22b-instruct-2507 1419.62.56%
2025-09-18gemini-2.5-pro 1456.1qwen3-235b-a22b-instruct-2507 1419.12.61%
2025-09-30gemini-2.5-pro 1452.9qwen3-vl-235b-a22b-instruct 1420.52.28%
2025-10-01gemini-2.5-pro 1452.1qwen3-235b-a22b-instruct-2507 1418.82.35%
2025-10-03claude-sonnet-4-5-20250929-thinking-32k 1453glm-4.6 1425.71.92%
2025-10-07gemini-2.5-pro 1451.8glm-4.6 1421.42.14%
2025-10-16gemini-2.5-pro 1450.7glm-4.6 1421.72.04%
2025-10-17gemini-2.5-pro 1450.8glm-4.6 1421.62.05%
2025-11-05gemini-2.5-pro 1451.6glm-4.6 1427.81.67%
2025-11-06gemini-2.5-pro 1451.9glm-4.6 1429.11.6%
2025-11-09gemini-2.5-pro 1452glm-4.6 1428.71.63%
2025-11-16gemini-3-pro 1500.6kimi-k2-thinking-turbo 1431.84.8%
2025-11-17gemini-3-pro 1502.2kimi-k2-thinking-turbo 1431.74.92%
2025-11-18gemini-3-pro 1497.9kimi-k2-thinking-turbo 1430.44.72%
2025-11-20gemini-3-pro 1495kimi-k2-thinking-turbo 1429.54.58%
2025-11-26gemini-3-pro 1492.4kimi-k2-thinking-turbo 1430.84.3%
2025-12-01gemini-3-pro 1491.4kimi-k2-thinking-turbo 1429.14.36%
2025-12-04gemini-3-pro 1490.8kimi-k2-thinking-turbo 1427.74.42%
2025-12-05gemini-3-pro 1491.3kimi-k2-thinking-turbo 1427.64.46%
2025-12-08gemini-3-pro 1490.3kimi-k2-thinking-turbo 1427.14.42%
2025-12-11gemini-3-pro 1491.8kimi-k2-thinking-turbo 1425.54.65%
2025-12-15gemini-3-pro 1491.2kimi-k2-thinking-turbo 14274.49%
2025-12-16gemini-3-pro 1492.1kimi-k2-thinking-turbo 1428.34.47%
2025-12-18gemini-3-pro 1491.4kimi-k2-thinking-turbo 1426.34.56%
2025-12-19gemini-3-pro 1490.1kimi-k2-thinking-turbo 1428.14.34%
2025-12-21gemini-3-pro 1490kimi-k2-thinking-turbo 1428.44.31%
2025-12-23gemini-3-pro 1489.9kimi-k2-thinking-turbo 1428.44.31%
2025-12-30gemini-3-pro 1490.2glm-4.7 1438.83.57%
2026-01-09gemini-3-pro 1489.6glm-4.7 1442.63.26%
2026-01-27gemini-3-pro 1487.9glm-4.7 1440.83.27%
2026-01-29gemini-3-pro 1487.3kimi-k2.5-thinking 1449.62.6%
2026-02-06claude-opus-4-6-thinking 1503.5kimi-k2.5-thinking 1448.83.78%
2026-02-09claude-opus-4-6-thinking 1504.4kimi-k2.5-thinking 1446.73.99%
2026-02-10claude-opus-4-6-thinking 1505glm-5 1470.42.36%
2026-02-11claude-opus-4-6-thinking 1505.9glm-5 1451.53.74%
2026-02-16claude-opus-4-6-thinking 1507glm-5 14553.57%
2026-02-17claude-opus-4-6-thinking 1506glm-5 1455.23.49%
2026-02-19claude-opus-4-6 1505.1glm-5 1454.53.48%
2026-02-20claude-opus-4-6 1505.1glm-5 1454.73.46%
2026-02-21claude-opus-4-6-thinking 1505.5glm-5 1452.43.65%
2026-02-22claude-opus-4-6-thinking 1505.5glm-5 1452.43.65%
2026-02-24claude-opus-4-6 1504.2glm-5 14533.52%
2026-02-25claude-opus-4-6 1503.8glm-5 1453.83.44%
2026-02-26claude-opus-4-6-thinking 1503.4glm-5 1455.43.3%
2026-03-03claude-opus-4-6 1505.1glm-5 1454.43.49%
2026-03-04claude-opus-4-6 1504.1glm-5 1453.23.5%
2026-03-05claude-opus-4-6 1504glm-5 1452.63.53%
2026-03-06claude-opus-4-6 1503.5glm-5 1451.73.57%
2026-03-11claude-opus-4-6 1503.4glm-5 1453.93.4%
2026-03-16claude-opus-4-6-thinking 1501.4glm-5 1453.53.29%
2026-03-18claude-opus-4-6-thinking 1502.1glm-5 1456.63.13%
2026-03-19claude-opus-4-6-thinking 1502.1glm-5 1456.43.14%
2026-03-20claude-opus-4-6-thinking 1502.1glm-5 1455.33.22%
2026-03-26claude-opus-4-6-thinking 1504.1glm-5 1455.83.32%
2026-03-31claude-opus-4-6-thinking 1504.2glm-5 1455.73.33%
2026-04-02claude-opus-4-6-thinking 1503.7glm-5 1455.43.32%
2026-04-07claude-opus-4-6-thinking 1502.8glm-5.1 1467.42.41%
2026-04-09claude-opus-4-6-thinking 1503.5glm-5.1 1470.72.24%
2026-04-10claude-opus-4-6-thinking 1503.8glm-5.1 1470.92.24%
2026-04-14claude-opus-4-6-thinking 1502.3glm-5.1 1471.22.12%
2026-04-17claude-opus-4-7-thinking 1504.5glm-5.1 1471.62.24%
2026-04-20claude-opus-4-7-thinking 1504glm-5.1 1468.82.39%
2026-04-22claude-opus-4-7-thinking 1502.6glm-5.1 1468.52.33%
2026-04-23claude-opus-4-7-thinking 1503.1glm-5.1 1469.62.28%
2026-04-27claude-opus-4-7-thinking 1503.2glm-5.1 1469.92.26%
2026-04-28claude-opus-4-7-thinking 1503.2glm-5.1 1469.92.26%
2026-04-29claude-opus-4-7-thinking 1502.9glm-5.1 1469.12.3%
2026-04-30claude-opus-4-7-thinking 1504glm-5.1 1470.32.29%
2026-05-01claude-opus-4-7-thinking 1502.7glm-5.1 1470.52.19%
2026-05-06claude-opus-4-7-thinking 1503.3glm-5.1 1471.22.18%
2026-05-07claude-opus-4-7-thinking 1503glm-5.1 1471.32.16%
2026-05-12claude-opus-4-6-thinking 1501.7glm-5.1 1471.12.08%
2026-05-14claude-opus-4-6-thinking 1501.5glm-5.1 1472.31.99%
2026-05-18claude-opus-4-6-thinking 1501.8glm-5.1 1472.22.01%
2026-05-19claude-opus-4-6-thinking 1502glm-5.1 1472.22.02%
2026-05-27claude-opus-4-6-thinking 1502.2glm-5.1 1473.91.92%
2026-06-03claude-opus-4-6-thinking 1503.3glm-5.1 1475.21.91%
2026-06-04claude-opus-4-6-thinking 1503.5glm-5.1 1475.41.9%
2026-06-05claude-opus-4-6-thinking 1503.6glm-5.1 14751.94%
2026-06-10claude-fable-5 1510.4glm-5.1 1475.22.38%
2026-06-16claude-fable-5 1507.6glm-5.1 1475.32.19%
2026-06-25claude-fable-5 1508.2glm-5.1 1473.42.36%
2026-07-02claude-fable-5 1508.5glm-5.1 1472.22.47%
2026-07-10claude-fable-5 1508.6glm-5.1 1472.12.48%
2026-07-12claude-fable-5 1507.5glm-5.1 1471.92.42%
2026-07-14claude-fable-5 1507.5glm-5.1 1471.72.44%
2026-07-16claude-fable-5 1507.5glm-5.1 1470.82.49%
2026-07-20claude-fable-5 1506.8glm-5.1 1469.92.51%
2026-07-21claude-fable-5 1507.3glm-5.1 1469.62.56%
2026-07-26claude-fable-5 1508kimi-k3-max 1485.31.53%
2026-07-27claude-fable-5 1507.6kimi-k3-max 1485.81.47%
2026-07-30claude-fable-5 1507.6kimi-k3-max 1485.81.47%
2026-08-02claude-fable-5 1508.6kimi-k3-max 1485.31.56%
2026-08-03claude-fable-5 1508.6glm-5.2-max 1469.52.66%
2026-08-06claude-fable-5 1507.3kimi-k3-max 1485.41.48%
2026-08-10claude-fable-5 1505.7kimi-k3-max 1487.31.23%
2026-08-11claude-fable-5 1506.4kimi-k3-max 1486.81.32%
2026-08-12claude-fable-5 1506.6kimi-k3-max 1488.61.21%
2026-08-19claude-fable-5 1507.3kimi-k3-max 1489.71.19%
2026-08-21claude-fable-5 1507.8kimi-k3-max 1489.11.25%
2026-08-27claude-fable-5 1507.5kimi-k3-max 1488.81.25%
2026-09-01claude-fable-5 1507.4kimi-k3-max 14891.23%
2026-09-02claude-fable-5 1507.2kimi-k3-max 1488.71.24%
2026-09-11claude-fable-5 1505.5glm-5.3-max 1485.61.34%
2026-09-13claude-fable-5 1505.7kimi-k3-max 1484.81.41%
2026-09-25claude-opus-5.5-high 1508.6kimi-k3-max 14881.38%
2026-09-30gemini-4-argon-high 1524.8kimi-k3-max 14882.47%
2026-10-02gemini-4-argon-high 1525.2kimi-k3-max 1488.42.48%
2026-10-08gemini-4-argon-high 1525.4kimi-k3-max 1488.12.51%
2026-10-13gemini-4-argon-high 1524.8kimi-k3-max 1488.12.46%
2026-10-15Gemini 4 Argon (High) 1523.9Kimi K3 (Max) 1487.12.48%
2026-10-20Gemini 4 Argon (High) 1523.9Kimi K3 (Max) 1488.12.41%
2026-10-22Gemini 4 Argon (High) 1517.2Kimi K3 (Max) 1487.42%

File: knowledge/data/derived/arena_top_closed_vs_open.csv

Since 2025, each new best open-weight model matched a closed model's score a median 5.4 months later; the fastest was DeepSeek-R1 at 1.1 months.

  • US lab
  • Chinese lab
  • Other country
  • Rule = median since 2025, 5.4 months
0510152023202420252026Llama 2-70B (2023-07-18): 4.1 months → GPT-4 (Mar 2023)Stable Beluga 2 (2023-07-20): 4.2 months → GPT-4 (Mar 2023)Yi-34B (2023-11-02): 7.7 months → GPT-4 (Mar 2023)Mixtral 8x7B (2023-12-11): 8.9 months → GPT-4 (Mar 2023)Mixtral 8x22B (2024-04-17): 13.1 months → GPT-4 (Mar 2023)Llama 3-70B (2024-04-18): 13.2 months → GPT-4 (Mar 2023)DeepSeek-V2 (MoE-236B, May 2024) (2024-05-07): 13.8 months → GPT-4 (Mar 2023)Qwen2-72B (2024-06-07): 14.8 months → GPT-4 (Mar 2023)Llama 3.1-405B (2024-07-23): 2.3 months → GPT-4o (May 2024)Qwen2.5-72B (2024-09-19): 4.2 months → GPT-4o (May 2024)Phi-4 (2024-12-12): 3 months → o1-miniDeepSeek-V3 (2024-12-26): 3.4 months → o1-miniDeepSeek-R1 (2025-01-20): 1.1 months → o1Qwen3-235B-A22B (2025-04-28): 4.3 months → o1DeepSeek-R1 (May 2025) (2025-05-28): 5.3 months → o1Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking (Jul 2025) (2025-07-25): 3.8 months → Gemini 2.5 Pro (Mar 2025)DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp (2025-09-29): 5.5 months → o3Kimi K2 Thinking (2025-11-06): 6.7 months → o3DeepSeek-V3.2 (2025-12-01): 7.5 months → o3Kimi K2.5 (2026-01-27): 5.7 months → GPT-5GLM-5.1 (2026-04-07): 8 months → GPT-5Kimi K2.6 (2026-04-20): 5 months → Gemini 3 ProGLM-5.2 (2026-06-16): 6.9 months → Gemini 3 ProKimi K3 (2026-07-16): 4.4 months → GPT-5.4 ProDeepSeek-R1 1.1
Source: Epoch AI, Epoch Capabilities IndexLicence: CC BY 4.0Data date: Chart: Mate in the Loop

LLaMA-65B has a negative lag, an artefact of ECI coverage starting 2023-02-24, so it is not drawn (it is in the table). Measured on one index, against the first closed model to reach the score.

Show the data table
Since 2025, each new best open-weight model matched a closed model's score a median 5.4 months later; the fastest was DeepSeek-R1 at 1.1 months.
Open modelCountryReleasedFirst closed model at that scoreLag (months)
LLaMA-65BUnited States of America2023-02-24GPT-4 (Mar 2023) (2023-03-14)-0.6
Llama 2-70BUnited States of America2023-07-18GPT-4 (Mar 2023) (2023-03-14)4.1
Stable Beluga 2United Kingdom2023-07-20GPT-4 (Mar 2023) (2023-03-14)4.2
Yi-34BChina2023-11-02GPT-4 (Mar 2023) (2023-03-14)7.7
Mixtral 8x7BFrance2023-12-11GPT-4 (Mar 2023) (2023-03-14)8.9
Mixtral 8x22BFrance2024-04-17GPT-4 (Mar 2023) (2023-03-14)13.1
Llama 3-70BUnited States of America2024-04-18GPT-4 (Mar 2023) (2023-03-14)13.2
DeepSeek-V2 (MoE-236B, May 2024)China2024-05-07GPT-4 (Mar 2023) (2023-03-14)13.8
Qwen2-72BChina2024-06-07GPT-4 (Mar 2023) (2023-03-14)14.8
Llama 3.1-405BUnited States of America2024-07-23GPT-4o (May 2024) (2024-05-13)2.3
Qwen2.5-72BChina2024-09-19GPT-4o (May 2024) (2024-05-13)4.2
Phi-4United States of America2024-12-12o1-mini (2024-09-12)3
DeepSeek-V3China2024-12-26o1-mini (2024-09-12)3.4
DeepSeek-R1China2025-01-20o1 (2024-12-17)1.1
Qwen3-235B-A22BChina2025-04-28o1 (2024-12-17)4.3
DeepSeek-R1 (May 2025)China2025-05-28o1 (2024-12-17)5.3
Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking (Jul 2025)China2025-07-25Gemini 2.5 Pro (Mar 2025) (2025-03-31)3.8
DeepSeek-V3.2-ExpChina2025-09-29o3 (2025-04-16)5.5
Kimi K2 ThinkingChina2025-11-06o3 (2025-04-16)6.7
DeepSeek-V3.2China2025-12-01o3 (2025-04-16)7.5
Kimi K2.5China2026-01-27GPT-5 (2025-08-07)5.7
GLM-5.1China2026-04-07GPT-5 (2025-08-07)8
Kimi K2.6China2026-04-20Gemini 3 Pro (2025-11-18)5
GLM-5.2China2026-06-16Gemini 3 Pro (2025-11-18)6.9
Kimi K3China2026-07-16GPT-5.4 Pro (2026-03-05)4.4

File: knowledge/data/derived/eci_open_weight_lag.csv

What it means for your industry

The time for an open model to reach a closed model's score (a median 5.4 months since 2025) is shorter than most enterprise procurement cycles. A terminal operator that standardises on open weights for on-prem use gets a model about as capable as last year's closed frontier.

  • Arena ratings are relative within one snapshot, so compare gaps, not levels, across years. Single records have wide confidence intervals; trust the median, not one dot.
  • The AI Index 2026 says GPT-4-0314 led Vicuna-13B by 174 points (15.2%) in May 2023 (PDF p.76). The Arena archive we use has no GPT-4 rows in snapshots from that period, so we do not compute the gap there. Stanford HAI, AI Index 2026 (CC BY-ND 4.0 — quoted, not redrawn)

Story 4 · Release type

The best models are increasingly not released as weights at all

API-only release became the most common route. Counts by release type and the open-weight share are drawn as two charts, not one dual-axis chart.

In 2025, API-only release (46 models) overtook open weights (45) for the first time.

  • Open weights
  • API access
  • Hosted or limited, no API
  • Unreleased or not recorded
  • * 2026 = partial year
02550751001252019 — Open weights: 312019 — Unreleased or not recorded: 376820192020 — Open weights: 282020 — API access: 12020 — Unreleased or not recorded: 215020202021 — Open weights: 412021 — API access: 42021 — Hosted or limited, no API: 52021 — Unreleased or not recorded: 297920212022 — Open weights: 412022 — API access: 82022 — Hosted or limited, no API: 52022 — Unreleased or not recorded: 379120222023 — Open weights: 592023 — API access: 202023 — Hosted or limited, no API: 42023 — Unreleased or not recorded: 3611920232024 — Open weights: 392024 — API access: 302024 — Hosted or limited, no API: 132024 — Unreleased or not recorded: 169820242025 — Open weights: 452025 — API access: 462025 — Hosted or limited, no API: 92025 — Unreleased or not recorded: 710720252026 YTD — Open weights: 292026 YTD — API access: 432026 YTD — Hosted or limited, no API: 82026 YTD — Unreleased or not recorded: 4842026*
Source: Epoch AI, Data on AI modelsLicence: CC BY 4.0Data date: Chart: Mate in the Loop

Epoch's list is a curation, not a census, so the mix also moves with what Epoch chooses to include.

Show the data table
In 2025, API-only release (46 models) overtook open weights (45) for the first time.
YearOpen weightsAPI accessHosted, no APILimitedUnreleasedNot recorded / otherTotalOpen share
2019310003706845.6%
2020281002105056%
2021414502907951.9%
2022418503619145.6%
202359204036011949.6%
202439301301609839.8%
20254546907010742.1%
2026 YTD294353408434.5%

File: knowledge/data/derived/notable_models_by_access_year.csv

The open-weight share of notable models fell from 49.6% in 2023 to 42.1% in 2025, and is 34.5% so far in 2026.

  • * 2026 = partial year (open dot, dashed)
0%25%50%75%100%2019: 45.6% open weights'192020: 56% open weights'202021: 51.9% open weights'212022: 45.6% open weights'222023: 49.6% open weights'232024: 39.8% open weights'242025: 42.1% open weights'252026 YTD: 34.5% open weights2026*49.6%42.1%34.5%
Source: Epoch AI, Data on AI modelsLicence: CC BY 4.0Data date: Chart: Mate in the Loop

Models with no release type recorded are left out of the denominator.

Show the data table
The open-weight share of notable models fell from 49.6% in 2023 to 42.1% in 2025, and is 34.5% so far in 2026.
YearOpen-weight share (of recorded)
201945.6%
202056%
202151.9%
202245.6%
202349.6%
202439.8%
202542.1%
2026 YTD34.5%

File: knowledge/data/derived/notable_models_by_access_year.csv

What it means for your industry

API-only means the operator's data leaves the site. In regulated or safety-critical operations — OT networks, vessel systems, grid control — the release type is a security control, not a pricing detail.

  • The AI Index 2026 counted 47 of 102 models as API-only for 2025 (PDF p.21), and notes that “the most capable models are now the least transparent” (PDF p.15). Stanford HAI, AI Index 2026 (CC BY-ND 4.0 — quoted, not redrawn)

Story 5 · Compute

The compute gap is roughly 47×

The largest training run per year, US and China. Marker fill shows how confident Epoch's estimate is. The axis is a log scale.

The largest US training run of 2026 used about 47× the compute of China's largest — both are Epoch estimates, so read it as “an order of magnitude or more”.

  • US
  • China
  • Filled = Confident
  • Faded = Likely
  • Open ring = Speculative
10¹⁹10²¹10²³10²⁵10²⁷US 2019: OpenAI Five, 6.7×10²² FLOP (Confident)China 2019: trRosetta, 3.8×10¹⁹ FLOP (Confident)2019US 2020: GPT-3 175B (davinci), 3.1×10²³ FLOP (Confident)China 2020: KEPLER, 1.7×10²¹ FLOP (Confident)2020US 2021: FLAN 137B, 2×10²⁴ FLOP (Confident)China 2021: ERNIE 3.0 Titan, 1×10²⁴ FLOP (Confident)2021US 2022: Minerva (540B), 2.7×10²⁴ FLOP (Confident)China 2022: GLM-130B, 3.5×10²³ FLOP (Confident)2022US 2023: Gemini 1.0 Ultra, 5×10²⁵ FLOP (Speculative)China 2023: Qwen-72B, 1.3×10²⁴ FLOP (Confident)2023US 2024: Llama 3.1-405B, 3.8×10²⁵ FLOP (Confident)China 2024: Doubao-pro, 2.5×10²⁵ FLOP (Likely)2024US 2025: Grok 4, 5×10²⁶ FLOP (Speculative)China 2025: Qwen3-Max, 1.5×10²⁵ FLOP (Speculative)2025US 2026 YTD: GPT-6 Astra, 9.4×10²⁶ FLOP (Likely)China 2026 YTD: Kimi K3, 2×10²⁵ FLOP (Speculative)2026*GPT-6 Astra 9.4×10²⁶Kimi K3 2×10²⁵log scale · FLOP
Source: Epoch AI, Data on AI modelsLicence: CC BY 4.0Data date: Chart: Mate in the Loop

In 2026 only 7 US and 9 Chinese notable models have a compute figure; the rest are empty, not zero.

Show the data table
The largest US training run of 2026 used about 47× the compute of China's largest — both are Epoch estimates, so read it as “an order of magnitude or more”.
YearCountryModelFLOPConfidenceModels with / without compute
2019United States of AmericaOpenAI Five6.7×10²²Confident32 / 24
2020United States of AmericaGPT-3 175B (davinci)3.1×10²³Confident26 / 11
2021United States of AmericaFLAN 137B2×10²⁴Confident42 / 12
2022United States of AmericaMinerva (540B)2.7×10²⁴Confident45 / 23
2023United States of AmericaGemini 1.0 Ultra5×10²⁵Speculative44 / 42
2024United States of AmericaLlama 3.1-405B3.8×10²⁵Confident26 / 31
2025United States of AmericaGrok 45×10²⁶Speculative15 / 49
2026 YTDUnited States of AmericaGPT-6 Astra9.4×10²⁶Likely7 / 42
2019ChinatrRosetta3.8×10¹⁹Confident3 / 3
2020ChinaKEPLER1.7×10²¹Confident5 / 3
2021ChinaERNIE 3.0 Titan1×10²⁴Confident17 / 4
2022ChinaGLM-130B3.5×10²³Confident7 / 5
2023ChinaQwen-72B1.3×10²⁴Confident15 / 8
2024ChinaDoubao-pro2.5×10²⁵Likely16 / 15
2025ChinaQwen3-Max1.5×10²⁵Speculative23 / 12
2026 YTDChinaKimi K32×10²⁵Speculative9 / 20

File: knowledge/data/derived/max_training_compute_us_china_year.csv

What it means for your industry

The China data points to doing more with less compute — the same constraint every on-prem industrial deployment lives under.

  • Most frontier compute figures are Epoch estimates, many of them Speculative. Compute and ECI come from the same publisher: consistent, but not independent confirmation.

Story 6 · Money

The US–China funding gap is far wider than the capability gap

Money and capability have different units. The two charts sit side by side, never on one axis — the point is the ratio.

On capability, the best US model leads the best Chinese model by 10.97 ECI points, about 6.5% of the US score (Oct 2026).

  • Shaded = under ~4 pts, within the 90% CI (noise)
01020304020232024202520262026-10: Claude Opus 5.5 168.83 vs Kimi K3 157.8611.0
Source: Epoch AI, Epoch Capabilities IndexLicence: CC BY 4.0Data date: Chart: Mate in the Loop

The percentage divides an interval-scale difference by a level, so it is a rough comparison only.

Show the data table
On capability, the best US model leads the best Chinese model by 10.97 ECI points, about 6.5% of the US score (Oct 2026).
MonthBest US (ECI)Best China (ECI)Gap (pts)
2023-06GPT-4 (Mar 2023) 125.74Baichuan1-7B 9035.74
2023-07GPT-4 (Mar 2023) 125.74Baichuan1-7B 9035.74
2023-08GPT-4 (Mar 2023) 125.74Baichuan1-7B 9035.74
2023-09GPT-4 (Mar 2023) 125.74Qwen-14B 112.8812.86
2023-10GPT-4 (Mar 2023) 125.74Qwen-14B 112.8812.86
2023-11GPT-4 (Mar 2023) 125.74Yi-34B 117.338.41
2023-12GPT-4 (Mar 2023) 125.74Yi-34B 117.338.41
2024-01GPT-4 Turbo (Nov 2023) 126.43Yi-34B 117.339.1
2024-02Claude 3 Opus 126.9Yi-34B 117.339.57
2024-03Claude 3 Opus 126.9Yi-34B 117.339.57
2024-04GPT-4 Turbo (Apr 2024) 127.27Yi-34B 117.339.94
2024-05GPT-4o (May 2024) 128.99DeepSeek-V2 (MoE-236B, May 2024) 124.84.19
2024-06Claude 3.5 Sonnet 130Qwen2-72B 125.284.72
2024-07Claude 3.5 Sonnet 130Qwen2-72B 125.284.72
2024-08Claude 3.5 Sonnet 130Qwen2-72B 125.284.72
2024-09o1-mini 135.7Qwen2.5-72B 128.976.73
2024-10o1-mini 135.7Qwen2.5-72B 128.976.73
2024-11o1-mini 135.7Qwen2.5-72B 128.976.73
2024-12o1 141.72DeepSeek-V3 132.39.42
2025-01o1 141.72DeepSeek-R1 138.822.9
2025-02o1 141.72DeepSeek-R1 138.822.9
2025-03Gemini 2.5 Pro (Mar 2025) 143.96DeepSeek-R1 138.825.14
2025-04o3 146.73Qwen3-235B-A22B 139.157.58
2025-05o3 146.73DeepSeek-R1 (May 2025) 141.135.6
2025-06o3-pro 147.33DeepSeek-R1 (May 2025) 141.136.2
2025-07o3-pro 147.33Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking (Jul 2025) 143.763.57
2025-08GPT-5 150Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking (Jul 2025) 143.766.24
2025-09GPT-5 150DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp 144.915.09
2025-10GPT-5 Pro 150.59DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp 144.915.68
2025-11Gemini 3 Pro 153.07Kimi K2 Thinking 145.827.25
2025-12GPT-5.2 Pro 156.33DeepSeek-V3.2 146.0910.24
2026-01GPT-5.2 Pro 156.33Kimi K2.5 148.078.26
2026-02GPT-5.3 Codex 157.09Kimi K2.5 148.079.02
2026-03GPT-5.4 Pro 159.57Kimi K2.5 148.0711.5
2026-04GPT-5.5 Pro 162.91Kimi K2.6 150.9411.97
2026-05GPT-5.5 Pro 162.91Qwen3.7-Max 154.048.87
2026-06Claude Fable 5 163.42Qwen3.7-Max 154.049.38
2026-07Claude Opus 5 163.94Kimi K3 157.866.08
2026-08Claude Opus 5 163.94Kimi K3 157.866.08
2026-09Claude Opus 5.5 168.83Kimi K3 157.8610.97
2026-10Claude Opus 5.5 168.83Kimi K3 157.8610.97

File: knowledge/data/derived/eci_best_us_vs_china_monthly.csv

OpenAI has raised $182.8B in equity and Anthropic $139.4B; the best-funded Chinese lab in the data, DeepSeek, $22.5B.

  • United States
  • China
  • Other country
$0B$50B$100B$150B$200BOpenAIOpenAI (United States of America): $182.8B$182.8BAnthropicAnthropic (United States of America): $139.4B$139.4BxAIxAI (United States of America): $37B$37BDeepSeekDeepSeek (China): $22.5B$22.5BMistral AIMistral AI (France): $6.5B$6.5BMiniMaxMiniMax (China): $619M$619MZ.ai (Zhipu)Z.ai (Zhipu) (China): $558M$558M
Source: Epoch AI, Data on AI companiesLicence: CC BY 4.0Data date: Chart: Mate in the Loop

Cohere, Google, Meta, Moonshot AI have no figure, so no bar is drawn (not zero). DeepSeek's figure rests on press reports of two 2026 rounds and should be re-checked.

Show the data table
OpenAI has raised $182.8B in equity and Anthropic $139.4B; the best-funded Chinese lab in the data, DeepSeek, $22.5B.
CompanyCountryCumulative equity funding (USD)
OpenAIUnited States of America182,750,000,000
AnthropicUnited States of America139,404,000,000
xAIUnited States of America37,000,000,000
DeepSeekChina22,500,000,000
Mistral AIFrance6,494,300,000
MiniMaxChina619,000,000
Z.ai (Zhipu)China558,000,000
CohereCanadano figure
GoogleUnited States of Americano figure
MetaUnited States of Americano figure
Moonshot AIChinano figure

File: knowledge/data/derived/frontier_company_funding.csv

What it means for your industry

Capital is concentrated in a handful of labs. Industry buyers should expect pricing power and lock-in on the closed side, and treat a cheap open-weight alternative as a real option.

  • Google and Meta have no figure: they are not standalone labs.
  • The AI Index 2026 puts 2025 US private AI investment at $285.9B, 23× China's $12.4B (PDF p.11, data: Quid). The report warns these figures likely understate China's total AI spending, given its government guidance funds. Stanford HAI, AI Index 2026 (CC BY-ND 4.0 — quoted, not redrawn)

Story 7 · Inside companies

Data science is not gone: its weight differs by industry

In the EU enterprise survey, text generation overtook machine learning — yet industries such as energy, where forecasting and maintenance matter, still lean on ML.

In EU firms, text generation overtook machine learning in 2024 (5.41% vs 4.24%); outside ICT, energy uses ML most, at 13.07%.

  • Machine learning for data analysis
  • Natural-language generation (incl. code)
0%10%20%30%40%50%All sectors'23'24'25All sectors 2023 — Machine learning for data analysis: 2.6%All sectors 2024 — Machine learning for data analysis: 4.24%All sectors 2025 — Machine learning for data analysis: 5.1%All sectors 2023 — Natural-language generation (incl. code): 2.1%All sectors 2024 — Natural-language generation (incl. code): 5.41%All sectors 2025 — Natural-language generation (incl. code): 8.76%5.18.8Manufacturing'23'24'25Manufacturing 2023 — Machine learning for data analysis: 1.73%Manufacturing 2024 — Machine learning for data analysis: 2.73%Manufacturing 2025 — Machine learning for data analysis: 3.66%Manufacturing 2023 — Natural-language generation (incl. code): 1.19%Manufacturing 2024 — Natural-language generation (incl. code): 3.53%Manufacturing 2025 — Natural-language generation (incl. code): 7.09%Energy'23'24'25Energy 2023 — Machine learning for data analysis: 8.51%Energy 2024 — Machine learning for data analysis: 12.59%Energy 2025 — Machine learning for data analysis: 13.07%Energy 2023 — Natural-language generation (incl. code): 4.2%Energy 2024 — Natural-language generation (incl. code): 8.91%Energy 2025 — Natural-language generation (incl. code): 17.17%13.117.2Transport'23'24'25Transport 2023 — Machine learning for data analysis: 1.35%Transport 2024 — Machine learning for data analysis: 1.98%Transport 2025 — Machine learning for data analysis: 2.69%Transport 2023 — Natural-language generation (incl. code): 1.28%Transport 2024 — Natural-language generation (incl. code): 3.32%Transport 2025 — Natural-language generation (incl. code): 3.92%ICT'23'24'25ICT 2023 — Machine learning for data analysis: 16.28%ICT 2024 — Machine learning for data analysis: 25.66%ICT 2025 — Machine learning for data analysis: 28.58%ICT 2023 — Natural-language generation (incl. code): 11.14%ICT 2024 — Natural-language generation (incl. code): 25.83%ICT 2025 — Natural-language generation (incl. code): 42.23%28.642.2
Source: Eurostat, isoc_eb_ain2 — reshaped by Mate in the LoopLicence: Eurostat copyright notice — free reuse with acknowledgementData date: Chart: Mate in the LoopEurostat is not responsible for this use of the data; we reshaped it.

EU-27, % of enterprises with 10+ employees. Energy ML use (13.07%) is about 2.6× the all-sector 5.1%. Shipping sits inside “Transportation & storage” and cannot be separated.

Show the data table
In EU firms, text generation overtook machine learning in 2024 (5.41% vs 4.24%); outside ICT, energy uses ML most, at 13.07%.
Activity (NACE)ML 2023→2024→2025NLG 2023→2024→2025Any AI 2025
All activities (excl. agriculture, mining, finance) (C10-S951_X_K)2.6% → 4.24% → 5.1%2.1% → 5.41% → 8.76%19.95%
Manufacturing (C)1.73% → 2.73% → 3.66%1.19% → 3.53% → 7.09%17.27%
Electricity, gas, steam (energy) (D35)8.51% → 12.59% → 13.07%4.2% → 8.91% → 17.17%33.57%
Transportation and storage (H)1.35% → 1.98% → 2.69%1.28% → 3.32% → 3.92%11.15%
Information and communication (J)16.28% → 25.66% → 28.58%11.14% → 25.83% → 42.23%62.52%

File: knowledge/data/derived/eurostat_ai_tech_by_industry.csv

The research side moved faster: language models were 84.9% of notable models in 2025, up from 51.6% in 2022.

  • * 2026 = partial year (open dot, dashed)
0%25%50%75%100%2016: 16.3% language'162017: 34.5% language'172018: 64.9% language'182019: 57.4% language'192020: 58% language'202021: 48.7% language'212022: 51.6% language'222023: 63.9% language'232024: 78.6% language'242025: 84.9% language'252026 YTD: 89.3% language2026*63.9%84.9%89.3%
Source: Epoch AI, Data on AI modelsLicence: CC BY 4.0Data date: Chart: Mate in the Loop

A different population: the chart above is EU company use; this one is models on a research list. A vision-language model counts as language.

Show the data table
The research side moved faster: language models were 84.9% of notable models in 2025, up from 51.6% in 2022.
YearLanguageOther domains onlyLanguage share
201684116.3%
2017193634.5%
2018241364.9%
2019392957.4%
2020292158%
2021384048.7%
2022474451.6%
2023764363.9%
2024772178.6%
2025901684.9%
2026 YTD75989.3%

File: knowledge/data/derived/notable_models_language_share_year.csv

What it means for your industry

Data science has not gone; its weight differs by sector. This data does not show that classical methods outperform LLMs. Transport and storage is the lowest adopter shown here.

  • This is EU data only; we found no comparable global, Korean or Gulf series. A firm can tick both technologies, and Eurostat does not say whether the ML is classical or deep learning.

How this page is made

  • Every number comes from a row in knowledge/data/derived/, and the charts are drawn from those CSVs at build time — no outside requests, no chart library.
  • Missing values stay missing — never drawn as zero.
  • Counts and percentages start at zero. ECI and Arena ratings have no meaningful zero, so we plot the gap. Compute uses a log scale.
  • The Stanford AI Index is CC BY-ND, so its figures are quoted with page numbers and never redrawn. Hugging Face data appears as aggregates only. Artificial Analysis is not used, because its terms forbid it.
  • What this data cannot say: which models industries actually run, anything about shipping on its own (it sits inside “transportation & storage”), or the country of use (every country field is the developer's).

See industry signals in the weekly insights →