We demonstrate an improvement of predictive capability brought to a non-linear material model using a combination of test data, sensitivity analysis, uncertainty quantification, and calibration. A model that captures increasingly complicated phenomena, such as plasticity, temperature and strain rate effects, is analyzed. Predictive maturity is defined, here, as the accuracy of the model to predict multiple Hopkinson bar experiments. A statistical discrepancy quantifies the systematic disagreement (bias) between measurements and predictions. Our hypothesis is that improving the predictive capability of a model should translate into better agreement between measurements and predictions. This agreement, in turn, should lead to a smaller discrepancy. We have recently proposed to use discrepancy and coverage, that is, the extent to which the physical experiments used for calibration populate the regime of applicability of the model, as basis to define a Predictive Maturity Index (PMI). It was shown that predictive maturity could be improved when additional physical tests are made available to increase coverage of the regime of applicability. This contribution illustrates how the PMI changes as "better" physics are implemented in the model. The application is the non-linear Preston-Tonks-Wallace (PTW) strength model applied to Beryllium metal. We demonstrate that our framework tracks the evolution of maturity of the PTW model. Robustness of the PMI with respect to the selection of coefficients needed in its definition is also studied.