GEM-4C 558 -4%
GPT-61S 555 -3.8%
CL-SN55 553 -3.8%
CL-OP55 551 -4%
GPT-61TERR 547 -3.5%
GEM-4CM 546 -4%
CL-OP55EH 542 -3.9%
GPT-61SOLXH 541 -3.6%
GPT-61SOLH 527 -3.7%
CL-SN55XH 523 -3.5%
GEM-4CL 520 -3.9%
GPT-61TERRXH 507 -3.4%
CL-OP55H 506 -4%
GPT-61SOLM 500 -3.5%
KIMI-K31P 499 -3.5%
GEM-4AR 498 -3.9%
GPT-61TERRH 490 -3.2%
CL-OP55M 483 -3.6%
MUSE-WONDFUL 479 -3.8%
CL-SN55H 467 -3.3%
CL-HK55 463 -2.9%
GPT-61TERRM 462 -3.1%
GPT-6A 451 -4.7%
MUSE-WOND 451 -3.6%
CL-HK55XH 450 -3%
GPT-6ASTRXH 440 -4.8%
GROK-47 440 -3.1%
GROK-47H 438 -2.9%
GPT-6ASTRH 437 -4.8%
DSK-V-340615 436 -2.9%
QWEN-38X 428 -2.9%
GPT-61SOLL 423 -3.2%
GLM-53 420 -3%
MIMO-V26P 420 -2.6%
CL-HK55H 419 -2.8%
LING-31F1019 417 -2.6%
GEM-38F 416 -2.8%
GPT-6ASTRM 415 -4.6%
MMAX-M31F 414 -2.8%
GEM-38FM 412 -2.8%
GPT-61TERRNO 411 -2.8%
GROK-47L 410 -2.8%
DSK-V-3E48BD 410 -2.6%
GPT-6L 407 -2.6%
GLM-53F 407 -2.6%
STEP-5 405 -2.6%
CL-FABL51XH 403 -4.7%
GPT-61TERRL 403 -2.9%
MIMO-V26F 401 -2.4%
CL-FABL51 399 -4.5%
CL-SN55M 395 -2.9%
CL-OP55L 393 -3.4%
MIST-LARG4 390 -2.7%
CL-FABL51H 386 -4.5%
CL-HK55M 386 -2.3%
GPT-6LUNAXH 377 -2.6%
MUSE-SPAROPE 375 -2.6%
MIST-LARG4M 371 -2.4%
DSK-V4P 365 -2.4%
GPT-6LUNAH 365 -2.1%
GLM-53L 364 -2.4%
CL-SN55L 362 -2.7%
GEM-38FL 361 -2.4%
GPT-6ASTRL 359 -4.5%
CL-FABL51M 359 -4.5%
QWEN-827B 349 -2.2%
CL-HK55L 347 -2%
MMAX-M3 345 -2%
GPT-6LUNAM 344 -2.3%
DSK-V-02811D 344 -2%
K2-HORI375BA 342 -2%
REFL-BEAM 338 -2%
QWEN-827BM 332 -1.8%
CL-FABL51L 329 -4.4%
QWEN-827BL 320 -1.8%
NEMO-35SUPEV 313 -1.9%
INKL 295 -1.7%
NVID-NEMO3UL 295 -1.3%
GEM-35FLITE 295 -1.3%
GPT-6LUNAL 287 -1.4%
GPT-6LUNANON 286 -1%
NANB-333B 285 -2.7%
QWEN-827BNON 282 -1.4%
COMM-APLUS 266 -1.1%
MUSE-GLIM 263 -1.1%
NEMO-35LIGH 261 -0.8%
GRAN-428B 258 -0.8%
MIST-SMAL4 252 -0.4%
INKL-SM 235 -2.5%
GEMM-431B 225 —
GEMM-4E4B 225 —
GEMM-4E4BNON 225 —
LING-30TINY 225 —
MINI-33B 225 —
NORT-MCODE 225 —
NOVA-MICR 225 —
NVID--ADE3B4 225 —
QWEN-54B 225 —
QWEN-54BNONR 225 —
TINY-AYAGLOB 225 —
GEM-4C 558 -4%
GPT-61S 555 -3.8%
CL-SN55 553 -3.8%
CL-OP55 551 -4%
GPT-61TERR 547 -3.5%
GEM-4CM 546 -4%
CL-OP55EH 542 -3.9%
GPT-61SOLXH 541 -3.6%
GPT-61SOLH 527 -3.7%
CL-SN55XH 523 -3.5%
GEM-4CL 520 -3.9%
GPT-61TERRXH 507 -3.4%
CL-OP55H 506 -4%
GPT-61SOLM 500 -3.5%
KIMI-K31P 499 -3.5%
GEM-4AR 498 -3.9%
GPT-61TERRH 490 -3.2%
CL-OP55M 483 -3.6%
MUSE-WONDFUL 479 -3.8%
CL-SN55H 467 -3.3%
CL-HK55 463 -2.9%
GPT-61TERRM 462 -3.1%
GPT-6A 451 -4.7%
MUSE-WOND 451 -3.6%
CL-HK55XH 450 -3%
GPT-6ASTRXH 440 -4.8%
GROK-47 440 -3.1%
GROK-47H 438 -2.9%
GPT-6ASTRH 437 -4.8%
DSK-V-340615 436 -2.9%
QWEN-38X 428 -2.9%
GPT-61SOLL 423 -3.2%
GLM-53 420 -3%
MIMO-V26P 420 -2.6%
CL-HK55H 419 -2.8%
LING-31F1019 417 -2.6%
GEM-38F 416 -2.8%
GPT-6ASTRM 415 -4.6%
MMAX-M31F 414 -2.8%
GEM-38FM 412 -2.8%
GPT-61TERRNO 411 -2.8%
GROK-47L 410 -2.8%
DSK-V-3E48BD 410 -2.6%
GPT-6L 407 -2.6%
GLM-53F 407 -2.6%
STEP-5 405 -2.6%
CL-FABL51XH 403 -4.7%
GPT-61TERRL 403 -2.9%
MIMO-V26F 401 -2.4%
CL-FABL51 399 -4.5%
CL-SN55M 395 -2.9%
CL-OP55L 393 -3.4%
MIST-LARG4 390 -2.7%
CL-FABL51H 386 -4.5%
CL-HK55M 386 -2.3%
GPT-6LUNAXH 377 -2.6%
MUSE-SPAROPE 375 -2.6%
MIST-LARG4M 371 -2.4%
DSK-V4P 365 -2.4%
GPT-6LUNAH 365 -2.1%
GLM-53L 364 -2.4%
CL-SN55L 362 -2.7%
GEM-38FL 361 -2.4%
GPT-6ASTRL 359 -4.5%
CL-FABL51M 359 -4.5%
QWEN-827B 349 -2.2%
CL-HK55L 347 -2%
MMAX-M3 345 -2%
GPT-6LUNAM 344 -2.3%
DSK-V-02811D 344 -2%
K2-HORI375BA 342 -2%
REFL-BEAM 338 -2%
QWEN-827BM 332 -1.8%
CL-FABL51L 329 -4.4%
QWEN-827BL 320 -1.8%
NEMO-35SUPEV 313 -1.9%
INKL 295 -1.7%
NVID-NEMO3UL 295 -1.3%
GEM-35FLITE 295 -1.3%
GPT-6LUNAL 287 -1.4%
GPT-6LUNANON 286 -1%
NANB-333B 285 -2.7%
QWEN-827BNON 282 -1.4%
COMM-APLUS 266 -1.1%
MUSE-GLIM 263 -1.1%
NEMO-35LIGH 261 -0.8%
GRAN-428B 258 -0.8%
MIST-SMAL4 252 -0.4%
INKL-SM 235 -2.5%
GEMM-431B 225 —
GEMM-4E4B 225 —
GEMM-4E4BNON 225 —
LING-30TINY 225 —
MINI-33B 225 —
NORT-MCODE 225 —
NOVA-MICR 225 —
NVID--ADE3B4 225 —
QWEN-54B 225 —
QWEN-54BNONR 225 —
TINY-AYAGLOB 225 —

Delayed ticker data. Last calculated 5 Nov 2026, 11:04 pm Sydney time.

← Back to feed

Claude Fable 5.1 Cracked a 374-Year-Old Cipher in 44 Minutes

Vals.ai gave Claude Fable 5.1 a single open-ended task: solve the Cyphral Distich, an encrypted couplet published by Sir Thomas Urquhart at the end of his 1653 work Logopandecteision. The cipher had resisted decryption for roughly 373 years.

The model returned a solution in 44 minutes, consuming 176,000 tokens. No human intervened.

The Cipher

The Cyphral Distich is 64 numbers arranged in two lines of 32:

5.3.27.38.32.14.21.8.66.8.70.39.5.9.12.18.2.3.56.5.1.7.3.2.13.19.3.25.9.3.16.6.
25.15.13.6.11.20.5.1.2.12.1.20.20.49.20.20.35.33.4.6.8.35.5.33.5.5.18.10.3.11.32.42.

It was posed as an open problem in Notes and Queries in 1899, appeared in cryptography literature through the 20th century, and was catalogued by historical-cipher researcher Klaus Schmeh among his Top 50 unsolved encrypted messages. Prior attempts applied frequency analysis, substitution, and homophonic substitution. None succeeded.

The Key Was Already There

Fable 5.1 noticed two things human decipherers had missed.

First: the cryptogram appears immediately after Urquhart’s 32 Proquiritations, and Urquhart explicitly draws attention to the number in the surrounding text — “there can no number like that of two and thirty … be pitched upon.”

Second: the accompanying poem promises the reader will find in the cipher “his own heart’s wishes, and the Author’s minde.” The Proquiritations themselves repeatedly close with phrases like “is the desire,” “wish,” or “hope of.”

The rule: for the i-th number in each cipher line, take the i-th Proquiritation, count to that word, and read its first letter. The key was not an external cipher alphabet. It was the book.

The Solution

O GOD UPHOLD KING CHARLS THE SECOND AND
MAKE HIM THE SUPREME RULER OF THIS LAND

Each line contains exactly 32 letters. The couplet rhymes. Urquhart was a committed Royalist; hiding a prayer for Charles II in a dense scholarly text is precisely what you would expect of him.

The Octastich

Urquhart left a second, much larger cryptogram in The Jewel (1652): the Cyphral Octastich, 285 numbers across eight lines, equally unsolved. Fable 5.1 applied the same logic and recovered all but nine letters.

What This Shows

Bruce Schneier noted the result on his security blog: “It’s good at things that involve lots of searching and testing.” That framing is exact. The Cyphral Distich was not cryptographically hard — it was a retrieval and cross-referencing problem requiring patience and a willingness to look for structure inside a 17th-century text rather than outside it. Prior researchers searched for an external cipher key. Fable 5.1 found an internal one.

Vals.ai reports that months of attempts with other frontier models produced no verified decryption before this run. The Cyphral Distich joins a short list of historical ciphers solved with computational assistance — but it appears to be the most long-standing to yield to a large language model working entirely without human guidance.