All evaluations

MMMU-Pro Benchmark Leaderboard

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

MMMU-Pro addresses limitations in the original MMMU (Massive Multi-discipline Multimodal Understanding and Reasoning Benchmark) through a three-step enhancement process: filtering out questions answerable by text-only models, expanding multiple-choice options from 4 to 10, and introducing a vision-only input format where questions are embedded within screenshots or photos.
The benchmark contains 3,460 questions across six core disciplines (Art & Design, Business, Science, Health & Medicine, Humanities & Social Science, and Tech & Engineering) and requires models to simultaneously process visual and textual information in a more realistic setting.
Performance results show substantial drops across all tested models compared to the original MMMU, demonstrating the benchmark's effectiveness in exposing current limitations in multimodal AI systems.

All evaluations are conducted independently by Artificial Analysis. More information can be found on our Intelligence Benchmarking Methodology page.

Publication

View on arXiv

MMMU-Pro: A More Robust Multi-discipline Multimodal Understanding Benchmark

Xiang Yue, Tianyu Zheng, Yuansheng Ni, Yubo Wang, Kai Zhang, Shengbang Tong, Yuxuan Sun, Botao Yu, Ge Zhang, Huan Sun, Yu Su, Wenhu Chen, Graham Neubig.

This paper introduces MMMU-Pro, a robust version of the Massive Multi-discipline Multimodal Understanding and Reasoning (MMMU) benchmark. MMMU-Pro rigorously assesses multimodal models' true understanding and reasoning capabilities through a three-step process based on MMMU: (1) filtering out questions answerable by text-only models, (2) augmenting candidate options, and (3) introducing a vision-only input setting where questions are embedded within images. This setting challenges AI to truly "see" and "read" simultaneously, testing a fundamental human cognitive skill of seamlessly integrating visual and textual information. Results show that model performance is substantially lower on MMMU-Pro than on MMMU, ranging from 16.8% to 26.9% across models. We explore the impact of OCR prompts and Chain of Thought (CoT) reasoning, finding that OCR prompts have minimal effect while CoT generally improves performance. MMMU-Pro provides a more rigorous evaluation tool, closely mimicking real-world scenarios and offering valuable directions for future research in multimodal AI.

MMMU-Pro

Claude Opus 5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Max Effort) scores the highest on MMMU-Pro with a score of 85%, followed by Gemini 3.5 Flash (high) with a score of 84%, and Claude Opus 5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Xhigh Effort) with a score of 84%

Score

MMMU-Pro: Score

Independently benchmarked by Artificial Analysis
Reasoning models are indicated by a lightbulb icon

Token Usage

MMMU-Pro: Token Usage

Tokens used to run the evaluation
Reasoning models are indicated by a lightbulb icon

The total number of tokens used to run the evaluation, including input tokens (prompt), reasoning tokens (for reasoning models), and answer tokens (final response).

Cost

MMMU-Pro: Total Cost to Run

Cost (USD) to run the evaluation
Reasoning models are indicated by a lightbulb icon

The cost to run the evaluation, calculated using the model's input and output token pricing and the number of tokens used.

Speed

MMMU-Pro: Time per Task

Weighted average decode time (minutes) per task; excludes TTFT and overhead time ยท Lower is better
No data available
Reasoning models are indicated by a lightbulb icon

The weighted average time (seconds) per evaluation task. This is calculated by dividing output tokens per task by output speed, weighted by the relative weights of each benchmark in the evaluation.

Score vs. Release Date

MMMU-Pro: Score vs. Release Date

Most attractive region

Example Tasks

Explore Evaluations

Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexArtificial Analysis Intelligence Index

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

Artificial Analysis Openness IndexArtificial Analysis Openness Index

A composite measure providing an industry standard to communicate model openness for users and developers.

AA-Briefcase: Agentic Knowledge Work BenchmarkAA-Briefcase: 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 LeaderboardGDPval-AA v2 Leaderboard

GDPval-AA v2 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.

APEX-Agents-AA Benchmark LeaderboardAPEX-Agents-AA Benchmark Leaderboard

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.

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 Benchmark LeaderboardHarvey LAB-AA Benchmark Leaderboard

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. The agent reads case documents in a sandbox and produces legal deliverables (e.g., memos, disclosure schedules, deposition summaries), graded criterion-by-criterion by a single LLM rubric judge.

EnterpriseOps-Gym-AA Benchmark LeaderboardEnterpriseOps-Gym-AA Benchmark Leaderboard

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.

๐œยณ-Banking Benchmark Leaderboard๐œยณ-Banking Benchmark Leaderboard

A fintech customer-support benchmark from the ๐œ-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 v2.1 Benchmark LeaderboardTerminal-Bench v2.1 Benchmark Leaderboard

A verified refresh of Terminal-Bench v2.0 โ€” 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.

Artificial Analysis Long Context Reasoning Benchmark LeaderboardArtificial Analysis Long Context Reasoning Benchmark Leaderboard

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 Benchmark LeaderboardSciCode Benchmark Leaderboard

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

Humanity's Last Exam Benchmark LeaderboardHumanity's Last Exam Benchmark Leaderboard

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 Benchmark LeaderboardCritPt Benchmark Leaderboard

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

GPQA Diamond Benchmark Leaderboard

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 Benchmark LeaderboardITBench-AA Benchmark Leaderboard

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 Benchmark LeaderboardMMMU-Pro Benchmark Leaderboard

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

IFBench Benchmark LeaderboardIFBench Benchmark Leaderboard

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

Terminal-Bench Hard Benchmark LeaderboardTerminal-Bench Hard Benchmark Leaderboard

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

๐œยฒ-Bench Telecom Benchmark Leaderboard๐œยฒ-Bench Telecom Benchmark Leaderboard

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 Benchmark LeaderboardMMLU-Pro Benchmark Leaderboard

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

LiveCodeBench Benchmark LeaderboardLiveCodeBench Benchmark Leaderboard

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 Benchmark LeaderboardMATH-500 Benchmark Leaderboard

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

AIME 2025 Benchmark LeaderboardAIME 2025 Benchmark Leaderboard

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

Global-MMLU-Lite Benchmark LeaderboardGlobal-MMLU-Lite Benchmark Leaderboard

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