所有评测

Harvey LAB-AA v1.1 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. 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.
查看示例任务

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

Muse Wonder Full (Max)在 Harvey LAB-AA v1.1 中得分最高,为 13.1%;其次是Muse Wonder (Max),得分 10.0%和Grok 4.7 (Xhigh),得分 9.4%

得分

Harvey LAB-AA v1.1:设有幻觉门槛的全部通过率

各任务中判定所有评分标准均通过的评审占比的平均值,出现任何重大幻觉的任务记为零 · 由 Artificial Analysis 独立进行基准测试
No publicly available API

幻觉

Harvey LAB-AA v1.1:每项任务的幻觉数

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

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

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
按未满足的标准数排序
No publicly available API

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

设有幻觉门槛的全部通过率是判定所有标准均通过的评审平均占比,出现任何重大幻觉的任务记为零 · Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index 衡量整个指数评测套件中的综合能力 · 两个坐标轴都是越高越好
Most attractive quadrant

成本

Harvey LAB-AA v1.1:每项任务成本

每项任务的平均成本(美元),按输入、缓存命中、缓存写入、推理和回答 Token 划分

Token 使用量

Harvey LAB-AA v1.1:每项任务的输出 Token

运行一项任务使用的输出 Token,按推理和回答 Token 划分
No publicly available API

速度

Harvey LAB-AA v1.1:每项任务耗时

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

轮次

Harvey LAB-AA v1.1:每项任务平均轮数

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

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)

Harvey LAB-AA v1.1:按法律业务领域划分的设有幻觉门槛的全部通过率 · 每个业务领域五项任务 · 在展示的模型中按业务领域对得分进行标准化;绿色代表该领域的最高分,红色代表最低分

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

Harvey LAB-AA v1.1设有幻觉门槛的全部通过率 · 参数量(十亿) · 仅开放权重模型
Most attractive quadrant
Pareto line

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

Most attractive region

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。

Mergers & Acquisitions

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.

参考文件

提供给模型

打开
打开
打开
打开
打开
打开
打开
打开
打开
打开
打开
打开
打开
打开
打开
打开
打开
打开
打开

模型提交结果

各模型生成的成果

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

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
Meta logoMeta
Muse Wonder Full (Max)13.1%95.5%0.62-2026年10月
2
Meta logoMeta
Muse Wonder (Max)10.0%95.1%0.89$13.862026年10月
3
SpaceXAI logoSpaceXAI
Grok 4.7 (Xhigh)9.4%92.8%0.74$9.492026年9月
4
Meta logoMeta
Muse Spark 1.3 (Max)8.9%96.0%1.68$4.212026年9月
5
OpenAI logoOpenAI
GPT-6 Astra (Max)8.6%90.6%0.03$13.672026年9月
6
OpenAI logoOpenAI
GPT-6.1 Sol (Max)6.9%90.6%0.09$2.482026年9月
7
Anthropic logoAnthropic
Claude Fable 5.1 (Max, Default Fallback)6.4%92.4%1.32$21.732026年9月
8
Kimi logoKimi
Kimi K3 (Max)5.3%93.0%2.09$6.192026年7月
9
Anthropic logoAnthropic
Claude Opus 5.5 (Max, Default Fallback)4.2%90.0%0.59$17.932026年9月
10
OpenAI logoOpenAI
GPT-6 Sol (Max)3.6%86.9%0.07$3.332026年9月
11
OpenAI logoOpenAI
GPT-6 Luna (Max)3.3%86.0%0.38$0.222026年9月
12
Mistral logoMistral
Mistral Large 4 Preview3.1%93.0%2.11$2.542026年10月
13
Anthropic logoAnthropic
Claude Sonnet 5.5 (Max, Default Fallback)2.8%92.1%1.03$14.032026年9月
14
Anthropic logoAnthropic
Claude Haiku 5.5 (Xhigh)2.8%88.0%1.61$0.432026年10月
15
DeepSeek logoDeepSeek
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Max)1.7%92.5%2.58$0.592026年9月

探索评测

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.

Artificial Analysis Openness IndexArtificial Analysis Openness Index

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

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 LeaderboardGDPval-AA v2.1 Leaderboard

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 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.

AA-AnalystAgent Benchmark LeaderboardAA-AnalystAgent Benchmark Leaderboard

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 Benchmark LeaderboardHarvey LAB-AA v1.1 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. 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 Benchmark LeaderboardGDP.pdf Benchmark Leaderboard

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 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.

Terminal-Bench 4.0 Benchmark LeaderboardTerminal-Bench 4.0 Benchmark Leaderboard

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 Benchmark LeaderboardTerminal-Bench-Science 0.1 Benchmark Leaderboard

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 Benchmark LeaderboardFrontierCode 1.1 Benchmark Leaderboard

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.

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.

Medical Long Context Reasoning (MLCR-AA)Medical Long Context Reasoning (MLCR-AA)

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.

𝜏³-Banking Benchmark Leaderboard𝜏³-Banking Benchmark Leaderboard

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 Benchmark LeaderboardTerminal-Bench 2.1 Benchmark Leaderboard

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.

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.

𝜏²-Bench Telecom Benchmark Leaderboard𝜏²-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.