Benchmark Almanac

A^3-Bench

Grok 4 Fast 65.1% leads since January 2026
Not in model cards

Models solve 2,198 science reasoning problems annotated with the anchors and attractors (prior knowledge) they need. An AAUI metric measures how much of that knowledge the model activates.

82 HF paper upvotes. No lab use found yet.

Released
January 2026
Kind
Science questions
Level
University
Scored
Checked automatically
Answers
Short answer
Tasks
All public
Strongest model tested
DeepSeek-V3.2 #90 on the capability index
Last model added
December 2025
Scores refreshed
November 12th, 2026

In the authors’ words

Scientific reasoning relies not only on logical inference but also on activating prior knowledge and experiential structures. Memory can efficiently reuse knowledge and enhance reasoning consistency and stability. However, existing benchmarks mainly evaluate final answers or step-by-step coherence, overlooking the memory-driven mechanisms that underlie human reasoning, which involves activating anchors and attractors, then integrating them into multi-step inference. To address this gap, we propose A³-Bench~ https://a3-bench.github.io, a benchmark designed to evaluate scientific reasoning through dual-scale memory-driven activation, grounded in Anchor and Attractor Activation. First, we annotate 2,198 science reasoning problems across domains using the SAPM process(subject, anchor & attractor, problem, and memory developing). Second, we introduce a dual-scale memory evaluation framework utilizing anchors and attractors, along with the AAUI(Anchor–Attractor Utilization Index) metric to measure memory activation rates. Finally, through experiments with various base models and paradigms, we validate A³-Bench and analyze how memory activation impacts reasoning performance, providing insights into memory-driven scientific reasoning.

Abstract of A³-Bench: Benchmarking Memory-Driven Scientific Reasoning via Anchor and Attractor Activation (arXiv:2601.09274, CC0)
10
Entries on its own leaderboard, 7 models we track

Grok 4 Fast leads with 65.1% among models released by December 2025

Best score per entry from the benchmark's own leaderboard, read on November 12th, 2026. Where a model ran with several settings or harnesses, we keep its best. Every run is in the next chart. Names in gray aren't in our model list: fine-tunes, agent systems, products and older models. They don't count toward leaders.

The newest model with a score here came out in December 2025, and nobody has tested a newer one. Among the 20 highest-ranked models on the capability index, these have no score yet:

  1. 1 Grok 4 Fast Oracle (expert anchors and attractors) 65.1%
  2. 2 Qwen3-30B Oracle (expert anchors and attractors) 60.6%
  3. 3 Qwen3-4B Oracle (expert anchors and attractors) 58.9%
  4. 4 Claude Haiku 4.5 Oracle (expert anchors and attractors) 56.4%
  5. 5 DeepSeek-V3.2 Oracle (expert anchors and attractors) 56%
  6. 6 GLM-4-32B Oracle (expert anchors and attractors) 48%
  7. 7 gpt-oss-120b HybridRAG retrieval 47.2%
  8. 8 Llama 3.1-70B Oracle (expert anchors and attractors) 44.8%
  9. 9 GPT-5 mini Oracle (expert anchors and attractors) 25.3%
  10. 10 Gemini-2.5-Flash (snapshot unspecified) HybridRAG retrieval 21.7%

Source: Official A^3-Bench leaderboard

#EntryScoreSettingDateSource
1 Grok 4 Fast 65.1% Oracle (expert anchors and attractors) Sep 2025 Official leaderboard
2 Qwen3-30B 60.6% Oracle (expert anchors and attractors) Official leaderboard
3 Qwen3-4B 58.9% Oracle (expert anchors and attractors) Apr 2025 Official leaderboard
4 Claude Haiku 4.5 56.4% Oracle (expert anchors and attractors) Oct 2025 Official leaderboard
5 DeepSeek-V3.2 56% Oracle (expert anchors and attractors) Dec 2025 Official leaderboard
6 GLM-4-32B 48% Oracle (expert anchors and attractors) Official leaderboard
7 gpt-oss-120b 47.2% HybridRAG retrieval Aug 2025 Official leaderboard
8 Llama 3.1-70B 44.8% Oracle (expert anchors and attractors) Jul 2024 Official leaderboard
9 GPT-5 mini 25.3% Oracle (expert anchors and attractors) Aug 2025 Official leaderboard
10 Gemini-2.5-Flash (snapshot unspecified) 21.7% HybridRAG retrieval Official leaderboard

Scores at each effort level

Models the leaderboard ran at two or more effort levels. We don’t have enough cost data here to say what the extra effort costs.

Lowest effort to highest, light to dark
Grok 4 Fast
Vanilla (no… HybridRAG r… Oracle (exp…
65.1%
Qwen3-4B
Vanilla (no… Oracle (exp…
58.9%
Claude Haiku 4.5
Vanilla (no… HybridRAG r… Oracle (exp…
56.4%
DeepSeek-V3.2
Vanilla (no… Oracle (exp…
56%
gpt-oss-120b
Vanilla (no… Oracle (exp…
47.2%
Llama 3.1-70B
Vanilla (no… HybridRAG r… Oracle (exp…
44.8%
GPT-5 mini
HybridRAG r… Oracle (exp…
25.3%

Source: Official A^3-Bench leaderboard

ModelEffortHarnessScoreCost per taskOutput tokens
Grok 4 Fast Oracle (expert anchors and attractors) 65.1%
Qwen3-4B Oracle (expert anchors and attractors) 58.9%
Grok 4 Fast HybridRAG retrieval 56.7%
Claude Haiku 4.5 Oracle (expert anchors and attractors) 56.4%
DeepSeek-V3.2 Oracle (expert anchors and attractors) 56%
Claude Haiku 4.5 HybridRAG retrieval 51.2%
Grok 4 Fast Vanilla (no memory) 47.5%
DeepSeek-V3.2 HybridRAG retrieval 47.3%
gpt-oss-120b HybridRAG retrieval 47.2%
gpt-oss-120b Oracle (expert anchors and attractors) 47.2%
DeepSeek-V3.2 Vanilla (no memory) 45.4%
Llama 3.1-70B Oracle (expert anchors and attractors) 44.8%
Claude Haiku 4.5 Vanilla (no memory) 41.3%
gpt-oss-120b Vanilla (no memory) 40.8%
Qwen3-4B HybridRAG retrieval 38.1%
Qwen3-4B Vanilla (no memory) 37.8%
Llama 3.1-70B HybridRAG retrieval 29%
GPT-5 mini Oracle (expert anchors and attractors) 25.3%
Llama 3.1-70B Vanilla (no memory) 24%
GPT-5 mini Vanilla (no memory) 22%
GPT-5 mini HybridRAG retrieval 18.7%

Number one over time

Lab claims count from the day the card came out, independent runs from the model’s release.

xAI
Own leaderboard Not tested since Jan 2026
Grok 4 Fast 65.1%

Source: Official A^3-Bench leaderboard

Scores over time

All the scores we have, one dot each, so a model tested at several settings appears more than once.

On the benchmark’s own leaderboard Best so far
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2025 2026 Near the ceiling (85%) Grok 4 Fast Qwen3-4B Llama 3.1-70B 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2025 2026 Near the ceiling (85%) Grok 4 Fast Llama 3.1-70B

Source: Official A^3-Bench leaderboard

No lab model card reports it yet

We read the headline results of 522 launch posts from 52 labs, and none of them list this benchmark.

More in Science and reasoning

All 92 in Science and reasoning
  • GPQA Diamond In use 198 graduate-level 'Google-proof' multiple-choice questions in biology, chemistry and physics. Gemini 4 Carbon 96.5%
  • Terminal-Bench-Science In use 70 scientific research-workflow tasks across five science areas, run in Harbor containers. Hidden tests give the resolution rate. GPT-6 Astra 68.1%
  • FrontierScience In use Models solve physics, chemistry, and biology problems in an Olympiad track graded by short answer and a Research track graded by 10-point rubrics. Intern-S2-397B 87%
  • BioMysteryBench In use Bioinformatics problems on anonymized real datasets that require real analysis with tools. Rubric-graded, with human-solvable and human-difficult splits. Claude Fable 5.2 83.7%
  • HiPhO In use Models solve theory problems from 2024 and 2025 physics olympiad exams, some with diagrams. Official marking schemes grade answers and steps, mapped to medal levels. Gemini 3 Pro 78.3%
  • LABBench2 In use 11 biology research sub-tasks (literature, figures, tables, patents, trials and more) with tool access. Macro-averaged accuracy. GPT-5.2 60.9%