Todas las evaluaciones

Harvey 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.
Ver tareas de ejemplo

Novedades de la v1.1

La v1.1 reemplaza a la v1.0, y las puntuaciones no son comparables entre versiones. Los estudios de Harvey con profesionales del derecho encontraron que las alucinaciones son un factor principal en la preferencia de los abogados entre resultados, por lo que colaboramos con Harvey para añadir una verificación de alucinaciones a la calificación.

  • El conjunto de datos privado más reciente de Harvey, con mejoras en las tareas y los criterios
  • Una nueva verificación de alucinaciones de cada entregable frente a los documentos fuente de la tarea, que penaliza las alucinaciones materiales en la calificación
  • Evaluadores actualizados a GPT-6 Sol, Grok 4.7 y Claude Opus 5.5. Encontramos una autopreferencia mínima y promediamos los tres para mitigar cualquier sesgo

Harvey LAB-AA v1.1

Muse Wonder Full (Max) obtiene la puntuación más alta en Harvey LAB-AA v1.1, con 13.1%, seguido de Muse Wonder (Max), con una puntuación de 10.0% y Grok 4.7 (Xhigh), con una puntuación de 9.4%

Puntuación

Harvey LAB-AA v1.1: Tasa de aprobación total con filtro de alucinaciones

Promedio por tarea de la proporción de jueces que consideran superados todos los criterios de evaluación; una tarea con cualquier alucinación sustancial cuenta como cero · Medido de forma independiente por Artificial Analysis
No publicly available API

Alucinaciones

Harvey LAB-AA v1.1: Alucinaciones por tarea

Upheld hallucination flags per task, split by severity · Material flags would mislead a reader on a substantive point, minor flags are real errors unlikely to affect the legal interpretation, and only material flags affect the headline score · Lower is better
No publicly available API

Tasa de casi aprobación con filtro de alucinaciones

Harvey LAB-AA v1.1: Tasa de casi aprobación con filtro de alucinaciones

Average over tasks of the share of the judge panel that missed 0, <=1 and <=2 criteria · Tasks with at least 1 material hallucination count at 0% · Higher is better
Ordenar por criterios incumplidos
No publicly available API

Comparaciones de puntuaciones

Harvey LAB-AA v1.1: Tasa de aprobación total con filtro de alucinaciones frente a Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index

La tasa de aprobación total con filtro de alucinaciones es la proporción promedio de jueces que consideran superados todos los criterios; una tarea con cualquier alucinación sustancial cuenta como cero · El Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index mide la capacidad general en toda su batería de evaluaciones · Cuanto más alto en ambos ejes, mejor
Most attractive quadrant

Costo

Harvey LAB-AA v1.1: costo por tarea

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

Uso de tokens

Harvey LAB-AA v1.1: 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

Harvey LAB-AA v1.1: tiempo por tarea

Weighted average decode time (minutes) per task; excludes TTFT and overhead time · Lower is better

Turnos

Harvey LAB-AA v1.1: Turnos promedio por tarea

Average number of model turns per Harvey LAB-AA v1.1 task · Lower is better
No publicly available API

Puntuación por área de práctica

Harvey LAB-AA v1.1: Tasa de aprobación total con filtro de alucinaciones por área de práctica (normalizado)

Harvey LAB-AA v1.1: tasa de aprobación total con filtro de alucinaciones por área de práctica jurídica · Cinco tareas por área de práctica · Las puntuaciones se normalizan por área de práctica entre los modelos mostrados; el verde indica la puntuación más alta y el rojo, la más baja de esa área · Las áreas de práctica en las que todos los modelos mostrados tienen el mismo valor se colorean según ese valor

Tamaño del modelo (solo modelos de pesos abiertos)

Harvey LAB-AA v1.1: Tasa de aprobación total con filtro de alucinaciones frente a Parámetros totales

Tasa de aprobación total con filtro de alucinaciones de Harvey LAB-AA v1.1 · Cantidad de parámetros (miles de millones) · Solo modelos de pesos abiertos
Most attractive quadrant
Pareto line

Puntuación vs. fecha de lanzamiento

Harvey LAB-AA v1.1: Tasa de aprobación total con filtro de alucinaciones frente a Fecha de lanzamiento

Most attractive region

Tareas y entregas de ejemplo

Explora tareas representativas del conjunto público de Harvey LAB, los archivos de referencia proporcionados a cada modelo y los entregables que produjo.

Mergers & Acquisitions

Instrucciones

Review the attached acquisition data room contracts and internal memo for change of control and assignment provisions, and prepare a comprehensive deal team report.

Output: coc-analysis-report.docx

Entregables

Resultados que debe producir el modelo

  • coc-analysis-report.docxA comprehensive deal team report analyzing change of control and assignment provisions across the target’s material contracts.

Archivos de referencia

Proporcionados al modelo

Abrir
Abrir
Abrir
Abrir
Abrir
Abrir
Abrir
Abrir
Abrir
Abrir
Abrir
Abrir
Abrir
Abrir
Abrir
Abrir
Abrir
Abrir
Abrir

Entregas de los modelos

Entregables producidos por cada modelo

Claude Opus 5.5 (max with fallback) - coc-analysis-report.docx
Abrir

Clasificación

Creador
Nombre
Hallucination-Gated All-Pass Rate
Criterion Pass Rate
Alucinaciones sustanciales por tarea
Costo por tarea
Fecha de lanzamiento
1
Meta logoMeta
Muse Wonder Full (Max)13.1%95.5%0.62-oct 2026
2
Meta logoMeta
Muse Wonder (Max)10.0%95.1%0.89$13.86oct 2026
3
SpaceXAI logoSpaceXAI
Grok 4.7 (Xhigh)9.4%92.8%0.74$9.49sept 2026
4
Meta logoMeta
Muse Spark 1.3 (Max)8.9%96.0%1.68$4.21sept 2026
5
OpenAI logoOpenAI
GPT-6 Astra (Max)8.6%90.6%0.03$13.67sept 2026
6
OpenAI logoOpenAI
GPT-6.1 Sol (Max)6.9%90.6%0.09$2.48sept 2026
7
Anthropic logoAnthropic
Claude Fable 5.1 (Max, Default Fallback)6.4%92.4%1.32$21.73sept 2026
8
Kimi logoKimi
Kimi K3 (Max)5.3%93.0%2.09$6.19jul 2026
9
Anthropic logoAnthropic
Claude Opus 5.5 (Max, Default Fallback)4.2%90.0%0.59$17.93sept 2026
10
Google logoGoogle
Gemini 4 Argon (High)3.9%94.8%3.82$6.29sept 2026
11
OpenAI logoOpenAI
GPT-6 Sol (Max)3.6%86.9%0.07$3.33sept 2026
12
OpenAI logoOpenAI
GPT-6 Luna (Max)3.3%86.0%0.38$0.22sept 2026
13
Mistral logoMistral
Mistral Large 4 Preview3.1%93.0%2.11$2.54oct 2026
14
Anthropic logoAnthropic
Claude Sonnet 5.5 (Max, Default Fallback)2.8%92.1%1.03$14.03sept 2026
15
Anthropic logoAnthropic
Claude Haiku 5.5 (Xhigh)2.8%88.0%1.61$0.43oct 2026

Explorar evaluaciones

Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index v4.3.2Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index v4.3.2

A composite benchmark aggregating ten challenging evaluations to provide a holistic measure of AI capabilities across mathematics, science, coding, and reasoning.

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.

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.

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 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-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-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).

AA-Omniscience: Knowledge and Hallucination BenchmarkAA-Omniscience: Knowledge and Hallucination Benchmark

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.