AI work model benchmark
Before you scale AI further, measure the difference on your own code.
90 minutes, the same code and the same tasks. Two work models in parallel comparison. One report for the decision.
benchmark
Operational advantage
result of a controlled session
A reference point, not a deployment forecast.
Starting point
AI in the team is not yet an advantage.
A controlled comparison shows the difference between the current way of working and the Nexir workflow on the same task scope.
Without a verification session
No measurement
The impact of AI is not measured in a comparable way.
No quality assessment
Speed of changes does not show their technical quality.
Different ways of working
Everyone uses AI according to their own rules.
Decision without comparison
The assessment relies on a presentation, not on work output.
With a Nexir verification session
Same code and scope
Comparison on your repository and tasks.
Two modes in parallel
REF and EXT work in one measurement window.
Work artifacts
Commits, pull requests, work time, and quality review.
Report for the decision
WPO, methodology, and material for the organization.
Process
How does the verification session work?
Four steps, one controlled measurement, and a report with the result.
Repository and scope
You point to your own repository or a .
No productionTasks just before start
Five tasks revealed only on session day.
Blind Test90 minutes, two modes
The organization developer and Nexir developer work in parallel.
90 minutesREF and EXTReport and decision
Throughput, artifacts, and quality in one report.
WPO result
Report
What does the decision-maker receive?
The report shows the WPO result, quality of changes, and repository artifacts.
WPO result
The main metric comparing REF and EXT modes.
REF vs EXT table
Time, commits, pull requests, files, and AI model cost.
Quality review
Completeness, correctness, architecture, and scope of changes.
Material for the decision
PDF, methodology, and reference point for the organization.
Sample report
See a sample session result
The preview covers the result, methodology, artifacts, and quality review.
Work model comparison
Wynik przewagi
5/5 zadań3×
| Metryka | REF | EXT | Δ |
|---|---|---|---|
| Czas pracy | 90 min | 65 min | -28% |
Methodology
What is the session result based on?
Four principles organize the comparison conditions.
Identical conditions
The same repository, the same scope, and a shared start.
Blind Test
Tasks revealed only before the session begins.
Artifacts in the repository
Commits and pull requests are the basis of assessment.
Quality correction
The result includes a technical assessment of changes.
Safety
Controlled scope. No deployment decision.
The session runs on a limited scope, with no connections to production.
No production
Local environment and an isolated repository fork.
No integration
No connections to internal systems.
No participant evaluation
The comparison covers the work model, not the person.
No commitment
The session does not start deployment.
Preview
What the session looks like in practice
The preview covers preparation, task delivery, and solution review.
Preparation
Repository, checklist, and environment readiness.
Task delivery
One task, recording changes, and a controlled flow.
Solution review
Pull request, quality criteria, and technical comment.
Measure the advantage on your own repository.
You receive a report with the result, method, and artifacts. The decision on the next stage stays with the organization.
For technology leaders
90 minutes of task delivery
Artifact-based measurement
Control on the organization side