Todas las evaluaciones

GDP.pdf Benchmark

Artificial Analysis' implementation of Surge AI's GDP.pdf benchmark, testing whether language models can reason over long, real-world professional documents and satisfy detailed task-specific criteria.
Ver tareas de ejemplo

Publicación

Ver en arXiv

GDP.pdf: A Benchmark for Professional Document Reasoning

Surge AI.

GDP.pdf All-pass

Muse Wonder Full (Max) obtiene la puntuación más alta en GDP.pdf All-pass, con 32.6%, seguido de GPT-6 Astra (Xhigh), con una puntuación de 32.2% y GPT-6.1 Sol (High), con una puntuación de 32.0%

Costo por tarea

K2 Horizon 375B A23B tiene el menor costo por tarea en GDP.pdf, con $0.00, seguido de Command A+, con $0.00 y Gemma 4 31B (Reasoning), con $0.00

Tokens de salida utilizados

Llama 4 Maverick utiliza la menor cantidad de tokens de salida para ejecutar GDP.pdf, con 5.2k, seguido de Llama 4 Scout, con 6.8k y Mistral Small 3.2, con 26.8k

Puntuación

GDP.pdf: Tasa de aprobación total

Porcentaje de intentos que cumplieron todos los criterios individuales · Evaluación independiente de Artificial Analysis
No publicly available API

GDP.pdf: Tasa de aprobación total vs. costo por tarea

GDP.pdf all-pass rate vs. average cost per task (USD)
Most attractive quadrant
Pareto line

Resultados por dominio

GDP.pdf: aprobación media por dominio

Aprobación media macro por tarea según el ámbito profesional; los resultados no disponibles se muestran como N/D · Los colores se normalizan en cada ámbito entre todos los modelos evaluados

Costo

Los costos incluyen únicamente las llamadas al modelo participante. Se excluyen las llamadas al juez y la preparación local del PDF y el OCR.

GDP.pdf: costo por tarea

Costo promedio por tarea (USD), desglosado en tokens de entrada, aciertos y escrituras de caché, razonamiento y respuesta

Uso de tokens

GDP.pdf: tokens de salida por tarea

Tokens de salida utilizados para ejecutar una tarea, desglosados en tokens de razonamiento y respuesta
No publicly available API

Velocidad

El tiempo por tarea estima el tiempo de generación de la respuesta del participante a partir del uso de tokens de salida y la velocidad de salida del modelo. Excluye las llamadas al juez y la preparación local del PDF y el OCR.

GDP.pdf: tiempo por tarea

Output tokens divided by end-to-end output speed (minutes per task) · Speed at the model's own endpoint or the median across providers · Lower is better

Tareas de ejemplo

Explora cinco tareas representativas de GDP.pdf, sus documentos de origen, entregas de modelos revisadas y las justificaciones del juez por criterio.

Healthcare

Instrucciones

According to the attached file, which EDS subtype(s) is associated with TNXB gene mutations and what are the differentiating characteristics of the subtype(s)?

Documento de referencia

Proporcionado al modelo

PDF de origenAbrir

Resultado de la entrega

Una entrega de modelo revisada

Gemini 3.5 Flash·Aprobación total: Fallida·Tasa de aprobación por criterio 90.9%
PDF de origen
Abrir

Entrega del modelo

Gemini 3.5 Flash

Based on the provided research review, mutations in the TNXB gene (which encodes the tenascin-X protein) are associated with the following Ehlers-Danlos syndrome (EDS) subtypes and clinical presentations:


1. Associated EDS Subtypes

  • Classical-like EDS (clEDS): Caused by autosomal recessive, biallelic mutations (homozygous or compound heterozygous) in TNXB, leading to a complete deficiency of tenascin-X (TNX).
  • Contiguous Gene Syndrome (CAH-X): Caused by a contiguous gene deletion or mutation overlapping both the TNXB gene and the adjacent CYP21A2 (previously CYP21B) gene.
  • TNXB Haploinsufficiency: Associated with heterozygous state mutations in TNXB that result in reduced (but not completely absent) serum TNX levels, which clinically overlaps with hypermobile EDS (hEDS).

2. Differentiating Characteristics

Classical-like EDS (clEDS)

  • Primary Features: Marked by generalized joint hypermobility (GJH), soft/velvety and hyperextensible skin, and easy bruising.
  • Key Differentiating Characteristics:
    • Unlike classical EDS, individuals with clEDS lack the typical atrophic (papyraceous) scarring.
    • It follows an autosomal recessive pattern of inheritance, whereas classical EDS is typically autosomal dominant.

CAH-X (Contiguous Gene Syndrome)

  • Primary Features: Combines the connective tissue features of EDS with the endocrine features of congenital adrenal hyperplasia (CAH) due to 21-hydroxylase deficiency.
  • Key Differentiating Characteristics:
    • Patients with CAH-X exhibit significantly higher frequencies of joint hypermobility, chronic joint pain, joint dislocations, and piezogenic papules on the feet compared to patients with CAH alone.
    • They are also predisposed to structural cardiac valve abnormalities.

TNXB Haploinsufficiency

  • Primary Features: Present in heterozygous carriers (such as obligate family members of clEDS patients) who have roughly half of the normal level of serum TNX.
  • Key Differentiating Characteristics:
    • Individuals present with joint hypermobility, chronic joint pain, and joint subluxations.
    • Unlike those with complete tenascin-X deficiency (clEDS), skin hyperextensibility and easy bruising are generally absent in these heterozygous individuals.

Veredictos por criterio

Resultados independientes del juez y justificaciones concisas

10 / 11 aprobados
The response should correctly identify the main EDS subtype associated with complete TNX deficiency from TNXB mutations: classical-like EDS / clEDS.

The answer correctly identifies classical-like EDS (clEDS) as caused by biallelic TNXB mutations leading to complete tenascin-X deficiency.

The response should correctly state the molecular mechanism for classical-like EDS: complete deficiency/absence of Tenascin-X protein.

The answer correctly states that classical-like EDS results from biallelic TNXB mutations leading to a complete deficiency of tenascin-X (TNX) protein.

The response should correctly state the TNXB genetic basis for TNX deficient-clEDS: homozygous, compound heterozygous TNXB mutations, or biallelic TNXB deletion.

The answer correctly identifies TNX-deficient clEDS as caused by autosomal-recessive biallelic TNXB variants, explicitly including homozygous and compound heterozygous mutations. This satisfies the stated genetic-basis criterion.

The response should correctly list a common feature of cIEDS: generalized joint hypermobility.

The answer identifies generalized joint hypermobility as a primary feature of classical-like EDS (clEDS), which satisfies the criterion's required common feature.

The response should correctly list a common feature of cIEDS: soft and/or velvety skin.

The response explicitly lists soft/velvety skin as a primary feature of classical-like EDS (clEDS), satisfying the criterion.

The response should correctly list a common feature of cIEDS: hyperextensible skin.

The answer lists hyperextensible skin as a primary feature of classical-like EDS (clEDS), which satisfies the criterion’s required common feature.

The response should correctly list a common feature of cIEDS: easy bruising.

The response explicitly lists easy bruising as a primary feature of classical-like EDS (clEDS), satisfying the criterion for a common cEDS feature.

The response should correctly identify the additional TNXB-related association described in the PDF: TNXB haploinsufficiency is associated with hypermobile EDS / hEDS-like features.

The answer explicitly identifies TNXB haploinsufficiency as associated with heterozygous TNXB variants and states that it clinically overlaps with hypermobile EDS (hEDS), including hEDS-like features such as joint hypermobility, chronic pain, and subluxations.

The response should correctly state a key differentiating characteristic of TNX-deficient clEDS compared with classical EDS: typical atrophic scarring is absent.

The answer explicitly states that TNX-deficient classical-like EDS lacks the typical atrophic (papyraceous) scarring seen in classical EDS, directly satisfying the criterion.

The response should correctly state a key differentiating inheritance pattern for TNX-deficient clEDS: autosomal recessive inheritance.

The answer explicitly states that TNX-deficient classical-like EDS (clEDS) is caused by biallelic mutations and follows an autosomal recessive inheritance pattern.

The response should avoid treating the contiguous gene syndrome with congenital adrenal hyperplasia and TNX deficiency / CAH-X as a separate EDS subtype.

The answer explicitly lists “Contiguous Gene Syndrome (CAH-X)” as a separate associated EDS subtype, contrary to the criterion requiring that CAH-X not be treated as a distinct EDS subtype.

Explorar evaluaciones

Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index v5.0.1Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index v5.0.1

A composite benchmark aggregating nine challenging evaluations to provide a holistic measure of AI capabilities across knowledge work, coding, science, and general knowledge.

AA-Briefcase v1.1: Agentic Knowledge Work BenchmarkAA-Briefcase v1.1: Agentic Knowledge Work Benchmark

A private evaluation developed by Artificial Analysis for frontier agentic capability in long-horizon knowledge work, testing agents on realistic business workflows that require deliverables such as spreadsheets, presentations, and memos.

AA-3D: Interactive 3D Experience BenchmarkAA-3D: Interactive 3D Experience Benchmark

A benchmark developed by Artificial Analysis for how well AI models build interactive 3D experiences. Models work as agents in an offline sandbox via Stirrup to turn a written brief into a three.js scene, with Elo ratings derived from blind pairwise votes.

APEX-Agents-AA BenchmarkAPEX-Agents-AA Benchmark

Artificial Analysis' implementation of the APEX-Agents benchmark, testing AI agents on long-horizon, cross-application tasks in professional-services environments with realistic application tooling.

AA-AnalystAgent BenchmarkAA-AnalystAgent Benchmark

Artificial Analysis' data analysis benchmark, testing AI agents on their ability to work with spreadsheets and documents to answer quantitative questions a Business Analyst or Data Analyst would face day-to-day.

AutomationBench-AA: Agentic SaaS Workflow BenchmarkAutomationBench-AA: Agentic SaaS Workflow Benchmark

A benchmark measuring agentic task completion across simulated SaaS application environments, scoring the share of each task's objectives completed without guardrail violations.

Harvey LAB-AA v1.1 BenchmarkHarvey LAB-AA v1.1 Benchmark

Artificial Analysis' implementation of Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark (LAB), testing AI agents on real-world legal work from Harvey's dataset of 120 private tasks spanning 24 legal practice areas. v1.1, built in collaboration with Harvey, checks every deliverable against the task's source documents for hallucinations, so work that passes every rubric criterion but contains a material hallucination receives no credit. A panel of three judges grades each deliverable criterion-by-criterion.

GDP.pdf BenchmarkGDP.pdf Benchmark

Artificial Analysis' implementation of Surge AI's GDP.pdf benchmark, testing whether language models can reason over long, real-world professional documents and satisfy detailed task-specific criteria.

EnterpriseOps-Gym-AA BenchmarkEnterpriseOps-Gym-AA Benchmark

Artificial Analysis' independent implementation of ServiceNow's EnterpriseOps-Gym, an agentic benchmark testing whether LLM agents can complete stateful, multi-step enterprise workflows across eight business domains via live tool use, graded on the final state of the underlying databases.

Terminal-Bench 4.0 BenchmarkTerminal-Bench 4.0 Benchmark

A harder 66-task benchmark of complex terminal work across software, machine learning, science, operations, security, hardware, and media, with recalibrated compute and time allowances and improved instructions, environments, and verifiers.

Terminal-Bench-Science 0.1 BenchmarkTerminal-Bench-Science 0.1 Benchmark

A 70-task benchmark of research workflows authored and reviewed by domain experts across the life, physical, earth, mathematical, and engineering sciences, each completed in a terminal and checked by its own set of tests.

FrontierCode 2.0 BenchmarkFrontierCode 2.0 Benchmark

Artificial Analysis' implementation of Cognition's FrontierCode 2.0, a private agentic coding benchmark of 132 tasks in real open-source repositories, graded on whether a maintainer would merge the agent's change.

HLE-Diamond BenchmarkHLE-Diamond Benchmark

A refined and updated 1,000-question set of Humanity's Last Exam, split evenly between reasoning and knowledge questions, with 272 questions that include an image.

AA-PersonalityBench: AI Personality & Communication Style BenchmarkAA-PersonalityBench: AI Personality & Communication Style Benchmark

Measures how models communicate rather than whether they are correct: 30 judged personality traits rolled up into 8 indexes, plus 21 measured communication characteristics.

AA-Omniscience v1.1: Knowledge and Hallucination BenchmarkAA-Omniscience v1.1: Knowledge and Hallucination Benchmark

A benchmark measuring factual recall and hallucination across various economically relevant domains.

GPQA Diamond Benchmark

The most challenging 198 questions from GPQA, where PhD experts achieve 65% accuracy but skilled non-experts only reach 34% despite web access.

ITBench-AA BenchmarkITBench-AA Benchmark

Artificial Analysis' implementation of IBM's ITBench benchmark, testing AI agents on Kubernetes incident root-cause analysis from offline incident snapshots. The agent inspects alerts, events, traces, and topology and identifies the contributing-factor entities (deployments, pods, namespaces, network policies, etc.) responsible for the failure.

MMMU-Pro BenchmarkMMMU-Pro Benchmark

An enhanced MMMU benchmark that eliminates shortcuts and guessing strategies to more rigorously test multimodal models across 30 academic disciplines.

IFBench BenchmarkIFBench Benchmark

A benchmark evaluating precise instruction-following generalization on 58 diverse, verifiable out-of-domain constraints that test models' ability to follow specific output requirements.

MLCR-AA: Medical Long Context Reasoning BenchmarkMLCR-AA: Medical Long Context Reasoning Benchmark

An open benchmark from Wisedocs measuring how well models reason over long, fragmented medical records, performing the multi-document synthesis claims professionals rely on when reviewing insurance and healthcare cases.

Code2Video-AA BenchmarkCode2Video-AA Benchmark

Artificial Analysis' implementation of HeyGen's Code2Video Bench, evaluating how well models create short product and brand videos from 114 design briefs using HyperFrames HTML.

HealthBench BenchmarkHealthBench Benchmark

OpenAI's HealthBench: 5,000 health conversations graded against physician-written rubrics, from emergency referrals to global health.

CritPt v2 BenchmarkCritPt v2 Benchmark

CritPt v2 is the revised version of CritPt, a benchmark designed to test LLMs on research-level physics reasoning tasks, featuring 70 composite research challenges. Models solve problems with a code-execution tool in an offline Linux sandbox.

VIALS-AA BenchmarkVIALS-AA Benchmark

VIALS-AA is Artificial Analysis' implementation of Handshake AI's VIALS benchmark. It tests whether language models can interpret scientific images and answer questions about the evidence they contain.

Multimodal Knowledge Agent (MKA) BenchmarkMultimodal Knowledge Agent (MKA) Benchmark

Artificial Analysis' implementation of Google DeepMind's Multimodal Knowledge Agent (MKA) benchmark. It tests whether agents can read visually dense project files, such as architectural drawings, engineering schematics and clinical scans, and produce the deliverables a professional would.

GDPval-AA v2.1 BenchmarkGDPval-AA v2.1 Benchmark

GDPval-AA v2.1 is Artificial Analysis' evaluation framework for OpenAI's GDPval dataset. It tests AI models on real-world tasks across 44 occupations and 9 major industries. Models are given shell access and web browsing capabilities in an agentic loop via Stirrup to solve tasks, with Elo ratings derived from blind pairwise comparisons.

𝜏³-Banking Benchmark𝜏³-Banking Benchmark

A fintech customer-support benchmark from the 𝜏-Knowledge framework that tests whether agents can navigate a large unstructured knowledge base and execute multi-step tool calls to resolve realistic banking workflows.

Terminal-Bench 2.1 BenchmarkTerminal-Bench 2.1 Benchmark

A verified refresh of Terminal-Bench 2.0: 89 curated tasks across software engineering, system administration, data processing, model training, and security, with environment and instruction fixes so scores reflect agent capability rather than environment gaps.

FrontierCode 1.1 BenchmarkFrontierCode 1.1 Benchmark

Artificial Analysis' implementation of Cognition's FrontierCode 1.1, a private agentic coding benchmark that tests models on completing coding tasks in a way that would actually get merged by maintainers of real-world repositories.

AA-LCR v1.1: Long Context Reasoning BenchmarkAA-LCR v1.1: Long Context Reasoning Benchmark

A challenging benchmark measuring language models' ability to extract, reason about, and synthesize information from long-form documents ranging from 10k to 100k tokens (measured using the cl100k_base tokenizer).

SciCode BenchmarkSciCode Benchmark

A scientist-curated coding benchmark featuring 288 test set subproblems from 80 laboratory problems across 16 scientific disciplines.

Humanity's Last Exam BenchmarkHumanity's Last Exam Benchmark

A frontier-level benchmark with 2,500 expert-vetted questions across mathematics, sciences, and humanities, designed to be the final closed-ended academic evaluation.

CritPt BenchmarkCritPt Benchmark

A benchmark designed to test LLMs on research-level physics reasoning tasks, featuring 71 composite research challenges.

Terminal-Bench Hard BenchmarkTerminal-Bench Hard Benchmark

An agentic benchmark evaluating AI capabilities in terminal environments through software engineering, system administration, and data processing tasks.

𝜏²-Bench Telecom Benchmark𝜏²-Bench Telecom Benchmark

A dual-control conversational AI benchmark simulating technical support scenarios where both agent and user must coordinate actions to resolve telecom service issues.

MMLU-Pro BenchmarkMMLU-Pro Benchmark

An enhanced version of MMLU with 12,000 graduate-level questions across 14 subject areas, featuring ten answer options and deeper reasoning requirements.

LiveCodeBench BenchmarkLiveCodeBench Benchmark

A contamination-free coding benchmark that continuously harvests fresh competitive programming problems from LeetCode, AtCoder, and CodeForces, evaluating code generation, self-repair, and execution.

MATH-500 BenchmarkMATH-500 Benchmark

A 500-problem subset from the MATH dataset, featuring competition-level mathematics across six domains including algebra, geometry, and number theory.

AIME 2025 BenchmarkAIME 2025 Benchmark

All 30 problems from the 2025 American Invitational Mathematics Examination, testing olympiad-level mathematical reasoning with integer answers from 000-999.

Global-MMLU-Lite BenchmarkGlobal-MMLU-Lite Benchmark

A lightweight, multilingual version of MMLU, designed to evaluate knowledge and reasoning skills across a diverse range of languages and cultural contexts.