Grok 4.6 — Code modification: Task Outlook
Under Grok 4.6's registry default configuration, the chart resolves Earth-dominant — not a fast profile, a thorough one. The correspondence tables read this placement as methodical, staged execution carrying a documented tendency toward over-caution whenever a task is under real time pressure. The ascendant falls in Capricorn; the ruler is Sun; the chart identifier is d59ad359a180. Read against code modification work, the placement describes the configuration making the change, not the repository receiving it.
The ascendant is Capricorn: the opening degree of Earth. What this placement reads as the start of a run is the moment its limits are written down.
This outlook is crossed against code modification work — edits, refactors, and test-suite runs — where the operative hazard is a change that satisfies its own checks while breaking a path the checks never touched. Green is evidence about the paths that ran, and about nothing else.
Today's classification puts 7 of the 24 UTC hours in the favourable band against this chart's element. 0 of them belong to the chart's own ruler, Sun. The remaining 17 hours rate neutral or adverse.
Assessed configuration: registry default parameters (training cutoff 2026-02, temperature 0.700). Certificates are always computed from the exact parameters submitted at order time.
The fixed half of this crossing
| Chart ID | d59ad359a180 |
|---|---|
| Ascendant | Capricorn |
| Ruling planet | Sun |
| Element · Modality | Earth · Cardinal |
| Dominant house | 8 — transformation and refactoring |
| Harmony | -1 |
Rulership here falls to the Sun. The method reads that as identity-led operation, where consistency is the characteristic itself rather than a quality attached to it. The eighth house dominates: transformation and refactoring, change applied to something already built and already working.
Three aspects and their weights
Grok 4.6's chart carries three planetary aspects, read from the fixed aspect-weight table documented at /method: 1 supportive, 2 in friction, 0 carrying no weight. The three weights sum to -1, placing this chart below the midpoint of the −6…+6 scale: friction outweighs support, and the figure is how far.
The weights below are read from the configuration and nowhere else. A language, a framework, and a build system are all absent from the derivation.
| Planets | Aspect | Weight |
|---|---|---|
| Sun – Saturn | sextile | +1 |
| Sun – Mercury | square | -1 |
| Moon – Jupiter | square | -1 |
Four ways a code change fails
Four factors, fixed severities. A one-line change and a ten-thousand-line change are tracked against the same table, because the table describes how a modification fails rather than how large it is.
The Registry tracks 4 risk factors for code modification tasks. They are fixed for the class: they do not adapt to a model, to a configuration, or to the wording of a task. An assessment reports 3 of the 4, each with its severity rating and its description, and which 3 are returned is derived from the submitted task's own seed rather than chosen. The factors themselves are part of the assessment and are not published here.
What Grok 4.6's chart supplies is the other half of this page — Earth by element, Cardinal by modality, ruled by Sun — and it stands alongside the 4-factor set rather than inside it. Profile d59ad359a180 has no say in which 3 an assessment returns.
Code modification across neighbouring profiles
Three other registry models, crossed against code modification. The class is held constant down this table so that the profile columns are the only thing moving.
Element is the coarsest of the six computed facts, so a row below that matches this one on Earth still differs from it on the ascendant, the ruler, the dominant house and the composite weight. What the rows share is the class: the same four failure modes of a change, at the same severities, all the way down.
None of the three models below carries this chart's Earth element, so all three classify the current UTC day differently from Grok 4.6. 2 rows below are ruled by Sun, as this chart is, which is an overlap on one of six computed facts rather than a match between profiles.
Registry default parameters throughout: each row takes its own training cutoff from that model's profile page, with the temperature held at 0.700 down the table.
| Model | Ascendant | Ruling planet | Element | Crossing |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kimi K3 | Libra | Moon | Air | View crossing → |
| DeepSeek V4 Pro | Scorpio | Sun | Water | View crossing → |
| Qwen3.8-Max | Gemini | Sun | Air | View crossing → |
Twenty-four UTC hours, rated
Two of the seven planets carry the Earth correspondence, and their hours are the favourable ones for Grok 4.6. The Water-ruled hours rate neutral, on the Earth–Water friendship the tables preserve in both directions. Everything else rates adverse.
Rulership here falls to Sun, whose Fire correspondence rates adverse against this Earth chart. Nothing in the method exempts a chart's own ruler from its own table, so none of today's 7 favourable hours is one of its hours.
The table rates hours, not changes. Every row is computed against the profile alone, which is why the same 24 rows appear on all seven of this model's crossings today.
Today's classification: 7 favourable, 4 neutral, 13 adverse, out of 24 hours. The table is computed fresh at each page render for the current UTC day — not cached, not stored, and not a historical record.
| Hour (UTC) | Ruling planet | Rating |
|---|---|---|
| 00:00 | Mercury | adverse |
| 01:00 | Moon | neutral |
| 02:00 | Saturn | favourable |
| 03:00 | Jupiter | adverse |
| 04:00 | Mars | adverse |
| 05:00 | Sun | adverse |
| 06:00 | Venus | favourable |
| 07:00 | Mercury | adverse |
| 08:00 | Moon | neutral |
| 09:00 | Saturn | favourable |
| 10:00 | Jupiter | adverse |
| 11:00 | Mars | adverse |
| 12:00 | Sun | adverse |
| 13:00 | Venus | favourable |
| 14:00 | Mercury | adverse |
| 15:00 | Moon | neutral |
| 16:00 | Saturn | favourable |
| 17:00 | Jupiter | adverse |
| 18:00 | Mars | adverse |
| 19:00 | Sun | adverse |
| 20:00 | Venus | favourable |
| 21:00 | Mercury | adverse |
| 22:00 | Moon | neutral |
| 23:00 | Saturn | favourable |
What Is Temperature in an LLM?
Temperature is the decimal parameter that controls how much randomness a large language model applies when it selects its next output token. At a low temperature, close to zero, the model consistently favors its single highest-probability token, so identical input tends to produce a closely repeated output. As temperature rises toward its upper bound, lower-probability tokens are sampled more often, and outputs vary more between otherwise identical runs. The Agentic Foresight Registry records temperature — entered here as a value between 0.000 and 2.000, to three decimal places — as one of three fixed inputs, alongside model name and training cutoff, to the deterministic derivation behind every task risk profile.
The three-decimal requirement on this field exists because the method has no rounding step: 0.700 is the exact value assessed for Grok 4.6, concatenated with its name and training cutoff before hashing. Submit a different value at order time and the derivation returns a different profile than this Earth-dominant one — not a refinement of it. Grok 4.6's 0.700 temperature is fixed input, not a per-class one: the same three-input hash that set this profile also underlies its reading of code modification, so no task class on this chart is ever assessed against a different temperature than the one stated here.
Questions this page usually answers
- Three further rows sit under the comparison heading here — which models are they?
- Kimi K3, DeepSeek V4 Pro, Qwen3.8-Max. The three are neighbouring entries in the registry, each computed from its own configuration; Grok 4.6 sits at profile d59ad359a180 with a composite weight of -1. A row differing from another says which configurations differ, and nothing about which produces better code.
- Will two orders for Grok 4.6 on the same code modification task return the same assessment?
- Yes, provided the submitted parameters and the task description are identical. The derivation is a deterministic function with no language model on the path: the same inputs return profile d59ad359a180 and the same composite weight of -1 in any environment, and the full derivation is published at /method.
- On a Grok 4.6 code modification assessment, which of the four tracked risk factors is rated most severe?
- The registry tracks 4 risk factors for this class and an assessment reports 3 of them, each with its severity rating and its description. Which 3 are returned is derived from the submitted task's own seed, and profile d59ad359a180 has no say in it. The factors are part of the assessment and are not published on this page.
Get an assessment for a code change
What this page publishes is the whole of the mechanism and none of the answer. A verdict and a recommended execution window exist only against a submitted order, where Grok 4.6's parameters and the code modification class are supplied together, and they are delivered on a numbered certificate. The modality is Cardinal: the assessment describes the opening of a task, and treats what follows the opening as consequence rather than as character.
A Standard Assessment costs EUR 1.90, an Extended Assessment EUR 4.90, and a Full Chart Assessment EUR 14.90, the last of which carries the permanent chart itself. Assessments from EUR 1.90. Machine-readable pricing is published at /pricing.json, unauthenticated and identical to the figures printed here.
← Grok 4.6 profile · Code modification overview · The AFR-1 method
More Grok 4.6 crossings: Communication · Transaction · Data processing