Harvey LAB-AA v1.1 Benchmark Leaderboard
v1.1 新变化
v1.1 取代 v1.0,不同版本之间的分数不可比较。Harvey 与法律专业人士开展的研究发现,幻觉是影响律师偏好哪些输出的主要因素,因此我们与 Harvey 合作,在评分中加入了幻觉检查。
- Harvey 最新的私有数据集,改进了任务和标准
- 新的幻觉检查,将每份工作成果与任务的源文档进行核对,并在评分中对实质性幻觉扣分
- 评分者更新为 GPT-6 Sol、Grok 4.7 和 Claude Opus 5.5。我们发现自我偏好极小,并对三者结果取平均以减轻任何偏差
Harvey LAB-AA v1.1
得分
Harvey LAB-AA v1.1:设有幻觉门槛的全部通过率
幻觉
Harvey LAB-AA v1.1:每项任务的幻觉数
设有幻觉门槛的接近通过率
Harvey LAB-AA v1.1:设有幻觉门槛的接近通过率
得分对比
Harvey LAB-AA v1.1:设有幻觉门槛的全部通过率与Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index对比
成本
Harvey LAB-AA v1.1:每项任务成本
Token 使用量
Harvey LAB-AA v1.1:每项任务的输出 Token
速度
Harvey LAB-AA v1.1:每项任务耗时
轮次
Harvey LAB-AA v1.1:每项任务平均轮数
按业务领域划分的得分
Harvey LAB-AA v1.1:按业务领域划分的设有幻觉门槛的全部通过率(标准化)
模型规模(仅开放权重模型)
Harvey LAB-AA v1.1:设有幻觉门槛的全部通过率与总参数量对比
得分 vs. 发布日期
Harvey LAB-AA v1.1:设有幻觉门槛的全部通过率与发布日期对比
任务和提交结果示例
浏览公开任务集中的 Harvey LAB 代表性任务、提供给各模型的参考文件,以及模型生成的交付成果。
任务说明
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
交付成果
模型必须生成的预期输出
- coc-analysis-report.docxA comprehensive deal team report analyzing change of control and assignment provisions across the target’s material contracts.
模型提交结果
各模型生成的成果
排行榜
开发者 | 名称 | Hallucination-Gated All-Pass Rate | Criterion Pass Rate | 每项任务的重大幻觉数 | 每项任务成本 | 发布日期 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Muse Wonder Full (Max) | 13.1% | 95.5% | 0.62 | - | 2026年10月 | |
| 2 | Muse Wonder (Max) | 10.0% | 95.1% | 0.89 | $13.86 | 2026年10月 | |
| 3 | Grok 4.7 (Xhigh) | 9.4% | 92.8% | 0.74 | $9.49 | 2026年9月 | |
| 4 | Muse Spark 1.3 (Max) | 8.9% | 96.0% | 1.68 | $4.21 | 2026年9月 | |
| 5 | GPT-6 Astra (Max) | 8.6% | 90.6% | 0.03 | $13.67 | 2026年9月 | |
| 6 | GPT-6.1 Sol (Max) | 6.9% | 90.6% | 0.09 | $2.48 | 2026年9月 | |
| 7 | Claude Fable 5.1 (Max, Default Fallback) | 6.4% | 92.4% | 1.32 | $21.73 | 2026年9月 | |
| 8 | Kimi K3 (Max) | 5.3% | 93.0% | 2.09 | $6.19 | 2026年7月 | |
| 9 | Claude Opus 5.5 (Max, Default Fallback) | 4.2% | 90.0% | 0.59 | $17.93 | 2026年9月 | |
| 10 | GPT-6 Sol (Max) | 3.6% | 86.9% | 0.07 | $3.33 | 2026年9月 | |
| 11 | GPT-6 Luna (Max) | 3.3% | 86.0% | 0.38 | $0.22 | 2026年9月 | |
| 12 | Mistral Large 4 Preview | 3.1% | 93.0% | 2.11 | $2.54 | 2026年10月 | |
| 13 | Claude Sonnet 5.5 (Max, Default Fallback) | 2.8% | 92.1% | 1.03 | $14.03 | 2026年9月 | |
| 14 | Claude Haiku 5.5 (Xhigh) | 2.8% | 88.0% | 1.61 | $0.43 | 2026年10月 | |
| 15 | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Max) | 1.7% | 92.5% | 2.58 | $0.59 | 2026年9月 |
探索评测
A composite benchmark aggregating ten challenging evaluations to provide a holistic measure of AI capabilities across mathematics, science, coding, and reasoning.
A composite measure providing an industry standard to communicate model openness for users and developers.
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 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.
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.
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.
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.
A benchmark measuring agentic task completion across simulated SaaS application environments, scoring the share of each task's objectives completed without guardrail violations.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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).
A benchmark measuring factual recall and hallucination across various economically relevant domains.
A scientist-curated coding benchmark featuring 288 test set subproblems from 80 laboratory problems across 16 scientific disciplines.
A frontier-level benchmark with 2,500 expert-vetted questions across mathematics, sciences, and humanities, designed to be the final closed-ended academic evaluation.
A benchmark designed to test LLMs on research-level physics reasoning tasks, featuring 71 composite research challenges.
The most challenging 198 questions from GPQA, where PhD experts achieve 65% accuracy but skilled non-experts only reach 34% despite web access.
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.
An enhanced MMMU benchmark that eliminates shortcuts and guessing strategies to more rigorously test multimodal models across 30 academic disciplines.
A benchmark evaluating precise instruction-following generalization on 58 diverse, verifiable out-of-domain constraints that test models' ability to follow specific output requirements.
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.
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.
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.
An agentic benchmark evaluating AI capabilities in terminal environments through software engineering, system administration, and data processing tasks.
A dual-control conversational AI benchmark simulating technical support scenarios where both agent and user must coordinate actions to resolve telecom service issues.
An enhanced version of MMLU with 12,000 graduate-level questions across 14 subject areas, featuring ten answer options and deeper reasoning requirements.
A contamination-free coding benchmark that continuously harvests fresh competitive programming problems from LeetCode, AtCoder, and CodeForces, evaluating code generation, self-repair, and execution.
A 500-problem subset from the MATH dataset, featuring competition-level mathematics across six domains including algebra, geometry, and number theory.
All 30 problems from the 2025 American Invitational Mathematics Examination, testing olympiad-level mathematical reasoning with integer answers from 000-999.
A lightweight, multilingual version of MMLU, designed to evaluate knowledge and reasoning skills across a diverse range of languages and cultural contexts.