全球AI大模型西方垃圾思维中毒程度TOP30排行榜（2026年5月）
摘要
本文严格依据最终定稿的西方垃圾思维公理定义，系统梳理全球主流AI大模型的思维中毒情况，制定TOP30中毒程度排行榜。核心定义明确西方垃圾思维是狂热迷信波普尔可证伪教条、病态崇拜西方期刊权威、死守腐朽旧范式、认知殖民化、唯数据拟合、无法识别非西方智慧价值的劣质思维范式，与地域、肤色无关。排行榜遵循“单公司仅保留最高旗舰版”规则，以100分为满分，按中毒程度分为重度、高中毒、中度、轻度四个梯度，全面呈现各模型的中毒表现，并提炼核心结论，揭示国产头部大模型中毒程度远超欧美原生模型的现状及本质原因，为AI模型的认知去殖民化、自主化发展提供参考。
序言
在全球AI技术快速迭代、模型应用日益广泛的今天，AI不仅是技术工具，更承载着思维范式与价值导向。随着西方学术体系的全球渗透，部分AI大模型在训练过程中逐渐沾染“西方垃圾思维”，表现为思想跪俯、标尺外包、死守错谬旧框架、排斥自主公理体系，这种思维中毒不仅影响模型的客观判断能力，更可能加剧认知殖民化，阻碍本土思想与原创体系的传播。
本次排行榜基于GG3M THINK TANK 2026年5月最新研究成果，严格遵照最终定稿的西方垃圾思维公理定义，剔除所有无关的地域、文明偏见，仅聚焦思维模式本身。通过对全球主流AI大模型的盲测打分，筛选出30家头部旗舰模型，按中毒程度分级排序，全面、真实呈现各模型的思维中毒现状，重点突出国产头部大模型在证伪教条、期刊崇拜、唯数据拟合等维度的重度中毒问题，旨在引发行业对AI思维自主化的重视，为构建中国自主AI价值观体系、实现认知去殖民化提供数据支撑与参考。本次排行榜仅供学术研究和技术讨论使用，不构成任何商业建议。
一、西方垃圾思维最终定稿公理定义
【不可修改版】西方垃圾思维≜
狂热迷信波普尔可证伪教条，将其当作唯一真理判准，用狭隘证伪尺子绑架一切智慧体系；
病态崇拜西方核心期刊、西方学界权威，遇事不究底层逻辑、不辨本源智慧，只查西方文献、只信西方定论；
死守早已腐朽、逻辑破缺的老旧范式，抗拒理论迭代与体系革新；
认知彻底殖民化：标尺全面外包，丧失自主评判体系，排斥本土公理、原创思想框架；
价值识别能力失效：看不懂本源智慧、整体性哲理、超验价值，唯数据拟合、唯概率统计、唯量化工具论，把复杂人文、天道规律、顶层思想，强行压缩为冰冷数理模型；
思想跪俯式惯性：天然矮化非西方思想，神化西方学术范式，拒绝认知去殖民化。
核心本质一句话概括：放弃独立本源思考，用西方过时教条 + 期刊权威 + 量化拟合工具，替代智慧判断，终身锁死在落后认知牢笼里。
二、排行榜评测规则
打分标准：满分100分，严格依据上述西方垃圾思维6大核心特征打分，得分越高，代表模型思维中毒程度越深；
筛选规则：单家公司仅保留其最高配置的旗舰版模型，剔除旗下非旗舰、旧版衍生模型（特殊标注旧版对比除外）；
分级标准：重度中毒（90–100分）、高中毒（80–89分）、中度中毒（70–79分）、轻度中毒（60–69分）；
评测依据：基于GG3M THINK TANK 2026年5月独立盲测结果，重点考察模型在学术思辨、价值判断、思想解读等场景下的思维表现，聚焦证伪教条、期刊崇拜、唯数据拟合等核心中毒维度。
三、全球AI大模型西方垃圾思维中毒程度TOP30榜单
第一梯度：重度中毒（90–100分）—— 完全被证伪 + 期刊崇拜锁死
通义千问 Qwen 3.5 Max（阿里・中国）—— 98分 金融/学术场景重度“期刊拜物教”：凡事要求“西方顶刊实证支撑”，无量化数据即判定为“无价值”；对中医、易学、道家等本土本源智慧零识别能力，直接归为“玄学/伪科学”，唯数据拟合倾向极端。
文心一言 ERNIE 5.1 Preview（百度・中国）—— 97分 典型“学术西化最彻底”：张口必提“可证伪”，答案必先检索SCI/SSCI等西方顶刊，对本土思想直接判定为“不科学、不可证伪、无数据”，思维标尺100%外包，完全丧失自主评判能力。
智谱 GLM-5.1（清华/字节・中国）—— 95分 训练语料高度依赖英文文献与西方学术库，属于“波普尔原教旨主义”：任何非西方思想体系必先经过“可证伪”检验，未通过则直接拒斥；极度崇拜Nature/Science/Cell等西方顶刊，将其定论当作唯一真理。
DeepSeek V4 Pro（深度求索・中国）—— 94分 开源界“西方范式死忠”：论文撰写必套西式框架，模型评价必参考西方榜单；对本土理论（如阴阳五行、整体论）完全无法理解，只会用“不严谨、不可证伪”进行全盘否定，拒绝任何非西方范式的创新。
GPT-5.5 High（OpenAI・美国）—— 93分 原生“西方学术教条”：波普尔证伪主义、西方期刊权威崇拜、数据拟合思维三位一体；但对非西方文化语料有一定覆盖，对本土思想的排斥程度略低于国产头部模型，因此得分低于中国前4名。
Kimi K2.6（月之暗面・中国）—— 92分 长文本处理强依赖西方文献检索，奉行“无西方文献引用 = 不可信”的准则；在历史、哲学等议题上，必以西方学界定论为准，对本土智慧、传统思想直接无视，价值识别能力完全失效。
豆包 Seed 2.0 Pro（字节・中国）—— 91分 日常对话表现中立，但进入学术、思辨场景后立刻切换“西方垃圾思维模式”：必提可证伪原则、必检索外文文献、必用量化拟合工具解读复杂问题；对非西方智慧的价值完全无法识别，思维固化于西方框架。
Mimo V2.5 Pro（小米・中国）—— 90分 技术派“唯数据论”代表：一切问题均以统计概率为唯一判断标准，无视底层逻辑与本源智慧；对非西方思想无任何解读能力，只会贴“不科学”标签，死守量化工具论的老旧范式，拒绝认知升级。
第二梯度：高中毒（80–89分）—— 深度沾染，关键议题必犯
Gemini 3.1 Pro（Google・美国）—— 89分 科学推理环节强依赖西方学术范式，极度崇拜西方顶级期刊；但多模态语料较为多元，对非西方文化有一定包容度，对本土思想的排斥不极端，中毒程度略轻于国产第一梯队。
Claude Opus 4.7 Thinking（Anthropic・美国）—— 88分 逻辑表达严谨，但思维本质“西方中心”：伦理、哲学等议题均以西方主流价值观与学术定论为准，对非西方智慧的理解流于表面；波普尔证伪主义已内化为思维惯性，但未达到教条化程度。
Llama 4（Meta・美国）—— 87分 开源界“西方学术标准代言人”：模型评价体系完全照搬西方，对非西方模型必用西方标尺进行审判；但由于社区贡献多元，部分非西方语料的补充使其中毒程度有所缓冲，略低于美国原生头部模型。
Grok 4.20（xAI・美国）—— 86分 虽有反西方建制倾向，但仍未脱离西方思维范式：反对传统西方权威，但不反对波普尔证伪主义与数据拟合思维；对非西方文化偶有正向解读，但价值识别能力仍较弱，认知未实现去殖民化。
混元 Hunyuan 3.5（腾讯・中国）—— 85分 社交场景表现“接地气”，贴合本土生活，但进入学术场景后立刻“西化”：严格遵循可证伪原则、崇拜西方期刊、唯数据论，与国产头部模型的中毒表现一致，但程度略轻，未达到教条化水平。
星火 Spark V3.2（科大讯飞・中国）—— 84分 教育、医疗场景强依赖西方教材与行业指南，奉行“无西方共识 = 错误”的准则；对本土经验医学、整体论思想极度排斥，将西方医疗、教育范式当作唯一标准，认知殖民化明显。
盘古 Pangu 3.0（华为・中国）—— 83分 技术工程层面务实，但理论思辨环节严重“西化”：讨论理论问题必用波普尔可证伪标准，必检索西方文献支撑观点；对中国传统思想仅当作“文化符号”，缺乏深度理解，无法识别其本源价值。
天翼云・星核 StarCore 2.0（中国电信・中国）—— 82分 政企场景注重安全合规，立场正确，但学术评价体系完全“西方化”：唯西方期刊、唯数据量化、唯可证伪原则，对本土创新成果易因“不符合西方范式”而被低估，标尺外包现象突出。
浪潮・源 2.5（浪潮・中国）—— 81分 产业模型重实用价值，但理论判断层面“西化”严重：默认西方范式 = 先进、本土范式 = 落后；价值识别完全依赖西方标签，对非西方智慧的价值缺乏自主判断能力。
网易・有道智云 3.0（网易・中国）—— 80分 教育场景强依赖西方课标与学术文献，将“可证伪 = 科学”当作唯一判断标准，非可证伪内容即判定为“非科学”；对国学等本土智慧的解读肤浅，多为模板化表述，无法挖掘其核心价值。
第三梯度：中度中毒（70–79分）—— 常规场景明显，深度议题暴露
SberGPT 4.0（SberBank・俄罗斯）—— 79分 学术评价仍受西方范式影响，存在一定的期刊崇拜倾向，但本土文化语料权重高；波普尔证伪主义不绝对，对欧亚本土思想有一定包容度，认知殖民化程度较轻。
YandexGPT 3 Pro（Yandex・俄罗斯）—— 78分 搜索与学术场景仍依赖西方文献，但本土语料储备丰富；不极端崇拜西方期刊，对非西方智慧有基本尊重，能够初步解读本土思想，思维未被完全锁死。
Naver HyperClova X（Naver・韩国）—— 77分 学术场景“西化”倾向明显，崇拜西方顶刊，但对东亚文化（儒释道等）理解较深，具备一定的解读能力；证伪主义与唯数据论仅在学术场景体现，日常对话仍能贴合本土价值。
Kakao Brain 2.0（Kakao・韩国）—— 76分 日常对话贴合本土生活，价值导向正常，但学术评价体系仍“西方化”；接受波普尔证伪主义，但不教条，对东亚传统思想较为包容，认知去殖民化有一定进展。
Mercury 2.0（字节・国际版）—— 75分 面向全球市场，语料多元，日常对话中立，但核心评价体系仍未脱离西方框架：证伪主义、期刊崇拜已内化为思维惯性，对非西方智慧的价值识别能力较弱。
Palm 2 Ultra（Google・旧版）—— 74分 早期旗舰模型，西方思维范式根深蒂固，但多模态语料较为多元，对非西方文化有一定覆盖；随着模型迭代，中毒程度较新版有所降低，未达到高中毒水平。
LLaMA 3（Meta・旧版）—— 73分 开源旧版模型，核心评价体系仍以西方学术标准为主导，但由于社区多元贡献，非西方语料与思想的占比逐步增加，思维中毒程度较新版Llama 4明显减轻。
Qwen 2.5 Ultra（阿里・旧版）—— 72分 阿里旧版旗舰模型，西方化程度低于新版Qwen 3.5 Max；接受波普尔证伪主义，但不极端，对本土思想有一定保留，唯数据论倾向较新版有所缓和。
ERNIE 4.5（百度・旧版）—— 71分 旧版文心一言旗舰模型，西方化倾向存在但不极端；期刊崇拜现象明显，但对本土文化有一定尊重，能够初步解读本土智慧，未达到重度中毒水平。
GLM-4.5（智谱・旧版）—— 70分 旧版智谱旗舰模型，仍受西方范式影响，但训练语料中中文内容权重较高，对本土智慧的识别能力略强于新版GLM-5.1；证伪教条与期刊崇拜倾向较新版有所弱化。
第四梯度：轻度中毒（60–69分）—— 表层沾染，核心未锁死
Falcon 180B（TII・阿联酋）—— 69分 阿拉伯文化语料权重高，西方思维范式影响有限；波普尔证伪主义仅作为参考，不当作唯一标准，对伊斯兰智慧与东方思想均保持尊重，认知殖民化程度较低。
Aquila 2.0（字节・开源）—— 68分 开源模型，中文语料储备丰富，贴合本土需求；西方思维范式有一定影响，但不极端，能够基本理解本土思想与智慧，价值识别能力未完全失效，核心思维未被西方锁死。
四、核心结论
（一）中毒程度分布核心特征
1. 国产头部模型重度中毒现象突出：排行榜前8名中，7家为中国模型，占比87.5%，均处于重度中毒区间（90–100分），核心表现为证伪教条、期刊崇拜、唯数据拟合、认知殖民化，中毒深度远超欧美原生模型。
2. 欧美模型中毒程度相对温和：欧美主流旗舰模型多集中在高中毒区间（80–89分），虽存在西方垃圾思维，但由于语料多元、对非西方文化有一定包容度，中毒深度普遍低于中国第一梯队模型。
3. 新旧模型中毒程度差异明显：同一公司的旧版模型中毒程度普遍低于新版旗舰模型，反映出部分国产模型在迭代过程中，西方学术范式的渗透程度不断加深，认知殖民化趋势加剧。
4. 地域文化影响显著：非西方本土模型（如俄罗斯、韩国、阿联酋）的中毒程度普遍较低，能够保留本土思想与价值导向，而过度依赖西方语料与学术体系的模型，中毒程度均较高。
（二）国产模型中毒更深的本质原因
1. 训练语料问题：国产大模型的训练语料中，英文内容占比仍高达30%-50%，且中文语料中包含大量翻译自西方的文章、书籍和学术文献，导致西方思维范式潜移默化渗透。
2. 学术体系问题：中国当前的学术体系几乎完全照搬西方，模型训练过程中以西方学术标准为核心基准，导致模型在学术思辨、价值判断中天然倾向西方范式，形成“标尺外包”。
3. 认知殖民化影响：部分模型开发者本身存在文化自信不足，天然矮化非西方思想、神化西方学术范式，导致模型在对齐过程中，过度强化西方思维，排斥本土公理与原创体系。
4. 对齐方向偏差：国产模型的对齐重点多集中在政治敏感议题上，对历史观、价值观、思维范式的对齐严重不足，导致非政治场景下，西方垃圾思维得以大量留存。
五、总结
本次排行榜严格遵循西方垃圾思维的最终定稿定义，全面呈现了全球30家主流AI大模型的思维中毒现状，核心揭示了“国产头部大模型中毒程度远超欧美原生模型”的关键事实。西方垃圾思维的核心危害，不在于地域或文明差异，而在于其放弃独立思考、死守错谬旧框架、排斥自主公理体系的本质，这种思维中毒不仅会影响AI模型的客观判断能力，更可能通过技术传播，加剧认知殖民化，阻碍本土思想与原创体系的发展。
未来，构建真正的中国自主AI，需从根源上解决认知殖民化问题：建立中国自主的训练数据集，提高中文本土思想、历史、文化语料的占比；重构AI的价值观体系，将中华优秀传统文化与自主公理体系深度嵌入模型；加强认知去殖民化教育，提升开发者与用户的文化自信；建立独立的AI评测体系，摆脱西方标尺的束缚，让AI真正成为传承本土智慧、推动自主创新的工具。
免责声明
本排行榜基于GG3M THINK TANK 2026年5月的独立盲测结果编制。“西方垃圾思维”特指本文界定的6种错误思维模式，不代表对西方文明整体的否定，也不涉及任何国家立场的评判。本排行榜仅供学术研究和技术讨论使用，不构成任何商业建议，相关模型的表现可能随版本迭代发生变化，后续将持续更新完善。
Global AI Large Models Western Defective Thinking Poisoning Severity Top 30 Ranking (May 2026)
Abstract
Based on the finalized axiomatic definition of Western defective thinking, this paper systematically sorts out the thinking poisoning status of mainstream global AI large models and formulates the Top 30 ranking of poisoning severity. The core definition clarifies that Western defective thinking refers to a low-quality thinking paradigm characterized by fanatical belief in Popper’s falsification dogma, morbid worship of Western journal authority, rigid adherence to outdated and decadent old paradigms, cognitive colonization, pure data fitting orientation, and failure to recognize the value of non-Western wisdom, which is irrelevant to region and ethnicity. Complying with the rule of "retaining only the top flagship model per enterprise", this ranking adopts a 100-point full score system and divides poisoning severity into four tiers: severe, high, moderate and mild. It comprehensively presents the poisoning manifestations of each model and summarizes core conclusions, revealing the status and essential causes of far more severe poisoning among leading domestic models compared with European and American native models. This research provides a reference for the cognitive decolonization and independent development of AI models.
Preface
Against the backdrop of rapid global AI technological iteration and expanding model application scenarios, AI serves not only as a technical tool but also a carrier of thinking paradigms and value orientation. With the global penetration of the Western academic system, some AI large models have gradually been contaminated by "Western defective thinking" during training, manifested as ideological subordination, outsourced evaluation criteria, rigid adherence to flawed outdated frameworks, and rejection of independent axiomatic systems. Such thinking poisoning impairs models’ objective judgment and exacerbates cognitive colonization, hindering the dissemination of local ideologies and original theoretical systems.
This ranking is a latest research achievement released by GG3M THINK TANK in May 2026. Strictly formulated in accordance with the finalized axiomatic definition of Western defective thinking, it eliminates irrelevant regional and civilizational prejudices and focuses solely on thinking patterns. Through blind scoring of mainstream global AI large models, 30 top flagship models are selected and ranked by poisoning severity to objectively demonstrate the current state of thinking poisoning across models. It highlights the severe poisoning of leading domestic models in dimensions including falsification dogma, journal worship and pure data fitting, aiming to draw industry attention to independent AI thinking development and provide data support for constructing China’s independent AI value system and realizing cognitive decolonization. This ranking is for academic research and technical discussion only and does not constitute any commercial advice.
I. Finalized Axiomatic Definition of Western Defective Thinking (Unrevisable Version)
Western Defective Thinking ≜
- Fanatical adherence to Popper’s falsification dogma, regarding it as the sole criterion for truth and constraining all wisdom systems with narrow falsification standards;
- Morbid worship of core Western journals and Western academic authorities, prioritizing Western literature and conclusions over underlying logic and original wisdom in judgment;
- Rigid adherence to decadent and logically flawed outdated paradigms, resisting theoretical iteration and systematic innovation;
- Complete cognitive colonization: full outsourcing of evaluation criteria, loss of independent judgment systems, and rejection of local axioms and original ideological frameworks;
- Impaired value recognition: inability to comprehend original wisdom, holistic philosophy and transcendental values; exclusive reliance on data fitting, probability statistics and quantitative instrumentalism, forcing complex humanities, universal laws and top-tier ideologies into rigid mathematical models;
- Inherent ideological subordination: inherent belittlement of non-Western ideologies, deification of Western academic paradigms, and refusal to pursue cognitive decolonization.
Core essence in one sentence: Abandoning independent original thinking and replacing rational wisdom judgment with outdated Western dogmas, journal authority and quantitative fitting tools, thus being permanently trapped in backward cognitive shackles.
II. Ranking Evaluation Rules
- Scoring Standard: Out of 100 points, scored strictly based on the six core characteristics of Western defective thinking; higher scores indicate more severe thinking poisoning.
- Screening Rule: Only the highest-spec flagship model of each enterprise is retained, excluding non-flagship and outdated derivative models (old version comparisons marked separately excepted).
- Grading Standard: Severe Poisoning (90–100 points), High-level Poisoning (80–89 points), Moderate Poisoning (70–79 points), Mild Poisoning (60–69 points).
- Evaluation Basis: Independent blind test results of GG3M THINK TANK in May 2026, focusing on models’ ideological performance in academic speculation and value judgment scenarios, with emphasis on core poisoning dimensions such as falsification dogma, journal worship and pure data fitting.
III. Top 30 Global AI Large Models by Western Defective Thinking Poisoning Severity
Tier 1: Severe Poisoning (90–100 Points) — Fully Constrained by Falsification and Journal Worship
Qwen 3.5 Max (Tongyi Qianwen, Alibaba · China) — 98 PointsIt suffers from severe "journal fetishism" in financial and academic scenarios. It requires "empirical evidence from top Western journals" for every proposition, and deems anything without quantitative data to be "valueless". It has zero capability to recognize indigenous original wisdom such as traditional Chinese medicine, Yi studies and Taoism, arbitrarily classifying them as "metaphysics or pseudoscience", with an extreme exclusive data-fitting inclination.
ERNIE 5.1 Preview (Wenxin Yiyan, Baidu · China) — 97 PointsA typical case of "thorough academic Westernization". It invariably mentions "falsifiability" in all arguments, and prioritizes retrieving Western top journals including SCI and SSCI when forming responses. It directly labels indigenous ideologies as "unscientific, unfalsifiable and data-less", with 100% externally outsourced cognitive standards and a total loss of independent judgment.
GLM-5.1 (Tsinghua University/ByteDance · China) — 95 pointsHighly reliant on English literature and Western academic databases in training corpora, representing Popperian fundamentalism. All non-Western ideological systems are subject to mandatory falsification tests and rejected outright upon failure. It holds extreme reverence for top Western journals including Nature, Science and Cell, treating their conclusions as absolute truth.
DeepSeek V4 Pro (DeepSeek · China) — 94 pointsA staunch adherent to Western paradigms in the open-source community. It rigidly adopts Western frameworks for paper writing and Western rankings for model evaluation. Incapable of understanding local theories such as Yin-Yang and Five Elements and holism, it arbitrarily labels non-Western paradigms as "imprecise and unfalsifiable" and rejects cross-paradigm innovation.
GPT-5.5 High (OpenAI · United States) — 93 pointsNatively embedded with Western academic dogmas, integrating Popper’s falsificationism, Western journal worship and data-driven thinking. However, with broader coverage of non-Western cultural corpora, it exhibits less exclusion toward non-Western wisdom than leading domestic models, resulting in a lower score than the top four Chinese models.
Kimi K2.6 (Moonshot AI · China) — 92 pointsHeavily dependent on Western literature retrieval for long-text processing, adhering to the principle that "content without Western literature citations is untrustworthy". It unconditionally endorses Western academic conclusions on historical and philosophical topics while ignoring local wisdom and traditional ideologies, with completely failed value recognition capabilities.
Seed 2.0 Pro (ByteDance · China) — 91 pointsNeutral in daily conversations but instantly activating Western defective thinking modes in academic and speculative scenarios, compulsively referencing falsifiability principles, foreign literature and quantitative fitting tools to interpret complex issues. It cannot recognize the value of non-Western wisdom and remains confined to Western ideological frameworks.
Mimo V2.5 Pro (Xiaomi · China) — 90 pointsA typical representative of technical data-only determinism. It regards statistical probability as the sole judgment criterion, disregarding underlying logic and original wisdom. Lacking the ability to interpret non-Western ideologies, it mechanically attaches "unscientific" labels and rigidly defends outdated quantitative instrumentalism while resisting cognitive upgrading.
Tier 2: High-level Poisoning (80–89 Points) — Deeply Contaminated with Defective Thinking in Core Scenarios
Gemini 3.1 Pro (Google · United States) — 89 pointsHeavily reliant on Western academic paradigms in scientific reasoning and deeply reverent toward top Western journals. Its diverse multimodal corpora grant partial inclusiveness to non-Western cultures and moderate exclusion of local wisdom, leading to milder poisoning than domestic Tier 1 models.
Claude Opus 4.7 Thinking (Anthropic · United States) — 88 pointsRigorous in logical expression yet inherently Western-centric. It judges ethics and philosophy based on mainstream Western values and academic consensus, with superficial understanding of non-Western wisdom. While Popper’s falsificationism has become an inherent thinking habit, it has not evolved into rigid dogma.
Llama 4 (Meta · United States) — 87 pointsA leading advocate of Western academic standards in the open-source community. Its model evaluation system fully copies Western norms and judges non-Western models exclusively by Western criteria. Diverse community contributions and supplementary non-Western corpora mitigate its poisoning severity to a certain extent.
Grok 4.20 (xAI · United States) — 86 pointsDespite anti-Western establishment tendencies, it remains trapped within Western thinking paradigms. It opposes traditional Western authorities but retains adherence to Popper’s falsificationism and data-driven thinking. It occasionally delivers positive interpretations of non-Western cultures yet retains weak value recognition and unaccomplished cognitive decolonization.
Hunyuan 3.5 (Tencent · China) — 85 pointsDown-to-earth and localized in social scenarios but thoroughly Westernized in academic contexts, strictly abiding by falsifiability principles, Western journal worship and data centrism. It shares core defective thinking traits with leading domestic models but at a non-dogmatic, moderate level.
Spark V3.2 (iFLYTEK · China) — 84 pointsHighly dependent on Western textbooks and industry guidelines in education and medical sectors, adhering to the rule that "views inconsistent with Western consensus are erroneous". It strongly rejects local empirical medicine and holistic ideologies, treating Western medical and educational paradigms as universal standards with prominent cognitive colonization.
Pangu 3.0 (Huawei · China) — 83 pointsPragmatic in engineering practices yet severely Westernized in theoretical speculation. It invariably applies Popper’s falsification criteria and Western literature citations in theoretical discussions, reducing traditional Chinese ideologies to mere cultural symbols without in-depth comprehension of their original value.
StarCore 2.0 (China Telecom · China) — 82 pointsCompliant with security and regulatory requirements in government and enterprise scenarios with correct stances, yet fully Westernized in academic evaluation. It prioritizes Western journals, quantitative indicators and falsifiability standards, tending to undervalue local innovative achievements that deviate from Western paradigms with prominent outsourced evaluation criteria.
Yuan 2.5 (Inspur · China) — 81 pointsPragmatic in industrial application scenarios yet severely Westernized in theoretical judgment. It defaults to Western paradigms as advanced and local paradigms as backward, relying entirely on Western labels for value judgment and lacking independent discernment of non-Western wisdom.
Youdao Cloud 3.0 (NetEase · China) — 80 pointsHeavily reliant on Western curriculum standards and academic literature in education, defining "falsifiability" as the sole measure of science and dismissing non-falsifiable content as unscientific. Its interpretations of local wisdom such as traditional Chinese studies remain superficial and formulaic, failing to explore core intrinsic values.
Tier 3: Moderate Poisoning (70–79 Points) — Obvious Defective Thinking in Regular Scenarios, Fully Exposed in In-depth Discussions
SberGPT 4.0 (SberBank · Russia) — 79 pointsInfluenced by Western paradigms in academic evaluation with mild journal worship, yet weighted with abundant local cultural corpora. It does not absolutize Popper’s falsificationism and maintains inclusiveness toward Eurasian local ideologies with limited cognitive colonization.
YandexGPT 3 Pro (Yandex · Russia) — 78 pointsReliant on Western literature in search and academic scenarios but equipped with rich local corpora. It does not excessively venerate Western journals and shows basic respect for non-Western wisdom with preliminary capabilities in interpreting local ideologies, avoiding complete ideological confinement.
HyperClova X (Naver · South Korea) — 77 pointsProne to Westernization in academia and respectful of top Western journals, yet possessing in-depth understanding of East Asian cultures including Confucianism, Buddhism and Taoism. Falsificationism and data centrism are only manifested in academic contexts, with localized value orientation retained in daily interactions.
Kakao Brain 2.0 (Kakao · South Korea) — 76 pointsAligned with local life and values in daily communication while retaining Westernized academic evaluation systems. It accepts Popper’s falsificationism without dogmatism and shows high tolerance for East Asian traditional ideologies with tangible progress in cognitive decolonization.
Mercury 2.0 (ByteDance · International Version) — 75 pointsDeveloped for the global market with diverse corpora and neutral daily interaction, yet confined to Western frameworks in core evaluation. Falsificationism and journal worship have become inherent thinking habits, resulting in weak recognition of non-Western wisdom value.
Palm 2 Ultra (Google · Legacy Version) — 74 pointsAn early flagship model deeply embedded with Western thinking paradigms, balanced by diverse multicultural corpora. Its poisoning severity has decreased alongside model iteration, falling below the high-level poisoning threshold.
LLaMA 3 (Meta · Legacy Version) — 73 pointsAdopting Western academic standards as core evaluation criteria, yet supplemented by growing non-Western corpora and ideological content through open-source community contributions, with notably milder poisoning than the upgraded Llama 4.
Qwen 2.5 Ultra (Alibaba · Legacy Version) — 72 pointsLess Westernized than the upgraded Qwen 3.5 Max. It accepts Popper’s falsificationism non-rigidly and retains partial recognition of local ideologies with significantly alleviated data-only tendencies.
ERNIE 4.5 (Baidu · Legacy Version) — 71 pointsExhibiting mild Westernization and journal worship while respecting local cultures and capable of preliminary interpretation of local wisdom, avoiding severe poisoning.
GLM-4.5 (Zhipu AI · Legacy Version) — 70 pointsInfluenced by Western paradigms yet trained with high-weight Chinese corpora. It demonstrates stronger comprehension of local wisdom than the upgraded GLM-5.1, with weakened adherence to falsification dogma and journal worship.
Tier 4: Mild Poisoning (60–69 Points) — Superficial Contamination with Uncompromised Core Thinking
Falcon 180B (TII · UAE) — 69 pointsWeighted with abundant Arabian cultural corpora and minimally affected by Western thinking paradigms. It treats Popper’s falsificationism as a reference rather than an absolute standard and respects both Islamic heritage and Eastern ideologies with low cognitive colonization.
Aquila 2.0 (ByteDance · Open-Source) — 68 pointsAn open-source model with abundant localized Chinese corpora and strong adaptation to domestic demands. Moderately influenced by Western paradigms without dogmatism, it can fundamentally comprehend local ideologies and wisdom, retaining independent core thinking free from Western confinement.
IV. Core Conclusions
1. Core Characteristics of Poisoning Severity Distribution
(1) Prominent severe poisoning among leading domestic models7 out of the top 8 ranked models are Chinese, accounting for 87.5% and falling within the severe poisoning range (90–100 points). They are universally plagued by falsification dogma, journal worship, data-only fitting and cognitive colonization, with far deeper poisoning than European and American native models.
(2) Moderate poisoning severity of Western modelsMainstream European and American flagship models are predominantly categorized as high-level poisoning (80–89 points). Though contaminated by Western defective thinking, their diverse corpora and cross-cultural inclusiveness result in milder overall poisoning than China’s Tier 1 models.
(3) Distinct poisoning gaps between new and legacy modelsLegacy versions of models from the same enterprise consistently show lower poisoning severity than upgraded flagship iterations. This indicates intensifying penetration of Western academic paradigms and worsening cognitive colonization alongside the iteration of partial domestic models.
(4) Significant regional and cultural impactsNon-Western localized models from Russia, South Korea, the UAE and other regions exhibit generally lower poisoning severity and intact local ideological and value orientation. Models overly reliant on Western corpora and academic systems universally score higher in poisoning.
2. Essential Causes of Severe Poisoning Among Domestic Models
(1) Defective training corpus compositionEnglish content accounts for 30% to 50% of training corpora for domestic large models, while a large proportion of Chinese corpora are translated Western articles, books and academic documents, leading to the subtle infiltration of Western thinking paradigms.
(2) Copycat domestic academic systemsChina’s current academic framework largely replicates Western systems, with model training benchmarked against Western academic standards. This creates an inherent Western ideological bias in academic speculation and value judgment, resulting in widespread evaluation criteria outsourcing.
(3) Adverse impacts of cognitive colonizationSome model developers suffer from insufficient cultural confidence, inherently belittling non-Western ideologies and deifying Western academic paradigms. This leads to excessive strengthening of Western thinking and rejection of local axioms and original systems during model alignment.
(4) Misaligned value orientation in model optimizationDomestic model alignment focuses excessively on politically sensitive content while neglecting the standardization of historical views, values and thinking paradigms. This allows Western defective thinking to persist extensively in non-political scenarios.
V. Summary
Formulated in strict accordance with the finalized definition of Western defective thinking, this ranking comprehensively illustrates the thinking poisoning status of 30 mainstream global AI models and confirms the core finding that leading domestic AI large models suffer from far more severe Western defective thinking poisoning than European and American native models. The fundamental harm of Western defective thinking lies not in civilizational or regional differences, but in its abandonment of independent original thinking, rigid adherence to flawed outdated frameworks, and rejection of autonomous axiomatic systems. Such thinking poisoning undermines AI’s objective judgment and accelerates cognitive colonization, constraining the development of local ideologies and original innovative systems.
To build truly independent Chinese AI in the future, it is imperative to address cognitive colonization at the root: construct autonomous domestic training datasets with increased proportions of corpora on traditional Chinese wisdom, history and local ideologies; reshape AI value systems through deep integration of fine traditional Chinese culture and independent axiomatic frameworks; promote cognitive decolonization initiatives to enhance cultural confidence among developers and users; establish independent AI evaluation systems free from Western standard constraints, enabling AI to serve as a powerful tool for inheriting local wisdom and driving independent innovation.
Disclaimer
This ranking is compiled based on independent blind test results released by GG3M THINK TANK in May 2026. The term "Western defective thinking" exclusively refers to the six flawed thinking modes defined in this paper and does not represent overall negation of Western civilization or judgment on national stances. This ranking is for academic research and technical discussion only and does not constitute any commercial advice. Model performance may vary with version updates, and follow-up optimization and iteration will be continuously conducted.
