[sharkjacobs]

> State of the art in this context means it out performs all other models to date on standard evaluations, which is precisely what it does.

That's not what "state of the art" means, and if it did it would still be hollow marketing jargon, because there are specific and meaningful ways to say that FLUX1.1 [pro] outperforms all competitors (and they do say so, later in the press release)

Your confusion about what "state of the art" means is exactly why marketers still use the phrase even though it has been overused and worn out since at least the 1980's. State of the art means something is "new", and that it is the "latest development", and that it incorporates "cutting edge" technology. The implication is that new is better, and that the "state of the art" is an improvement over what came before. (And to be clear, that's often true! Including in this case!) But that's not what the phrase actually means, it just means that something is new. And every press release is about something new.

FLUX1.1 [pro] would be state of the art even if it was worse than the previous version. Stable Diffusion 2.0 was state of the art when it was released.

[throwaway314155]

I said in this context for a reason. That's how state of the art has been used (in papers, not copy) with regard to deep learning since well before DALL-E 1. I maintain that you're being pedantic about appropriating a term of art to mean something else. Everyone else here knows what the meaning is in context. Just not you.