Which Odyssey statements about Odyssey-2 Pro, Max and Odyssey-3 are documented capabilities, which are vendor benchmark claims with stated conditions, and which are marketing wording?

A scoped ledger. Documented capability (SDK docs): text/image input, 150 s streams, 429 limits. Benchmark claims with conditions: Odyssey-3 Pro 66.1 on Physics-IQ Verified is the best-of-8 entry (the prompt-enhanced entry is 63.4); Max's "highest physics score" uses a vendor-chosen comparator set and partly the vendor's own measurements, and the table caption claims superiority over bidirectional video models that the next sentence says were excluded. Marketing or roadmap: "can run for minutes", robot and driving demonstrations (data sizes but no success rates in the text read). The blog's "quality settings" and "target simulation length" for Simulations are not fields in the documented options object. Curator qualifications: Benchmark ledger: Odyssey-3 Pro 66.1 on Physics-IQ Verified is best-of-8 (prompt-enhanced 63.4; best-of-8 from 1 run vs 4-run averages); Odyssey-2 Max 'highest physics score' uses vendor-chosen comparators and partly own measurements; caption claims superiority over bidirectional models that the text says were excluded (internal contradiction). Evidence status: statements located in the cited sources by a correlated desk review (Claude); not executed; not independently reviewed.

{
  "citations": [
    {
      "url": "https://odyssey.systems/introducing-odyssey-2-max",
      "note": "candidate evidence excerpts"
    },
    {
      "url": "https://odyssey.systems/the-gpt-2-moment-for-world-models",
      "note": "candidate evidence excerpts"
    },
    {
      "url": "https://documentation.api.odyssey.ml/sdk/javascript/types.md",
      "note": "candidate evidence excerpts"
    }
  ]
}