AGIEval
Questions from human standardized exams (gaokao, SAT, LSAT, bar). Multiple-choice and cloze accuracy.
Saturated. AGIEval v1.1 (2024-06) replaced the Chinese Gaokao science tasks with 2023 questions and made every MCQ single-answer. AGIEval-en is unchanged, and base-model cards mostly report it.
- Made by
- Microsoft
- Released
- April 2023
- Kind
- Exam questions
- Level
- School
- Scored
- Checked automatically
- Answers
- Multiple choice
- Tasks
- All public
- Strongest model tested
-
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash #34 on the capability index
- Last in a launch post
- September 2026, dropped after it saturated
- Last model added
- October 2026
In the authors’ words
Evaluating the general abilities of foundation models to tackle human-level tasks is a vital aspect of their development and application in the pursuit of Artificial General Intelligence (AGI). Traditional benchmarks, which rely on artificial datasets, may not accurately represent human-level capabilities. In this paper, we introduce AGIEval, a novel benchmark specifically designed to assess foundation model in the context of human-centric standardized exams, such as college entrance exams, law school admission tests, math competitions, and lawyer qualification tests. We evaluate several state-of-the-art foundation models, including GPT-4, ChatGPT, and Text-Davinci-003, using this benchmark. Impressively, GPT-4 surpasses average human performance on SAT, LSAT, and math competitions, attaining a 95% accuracy rate on the SAT Math test and a 92.5% accuracy on the English test of the Chinese national college entrance exam. This demonstrates the extraordinary performance of contemporary foundation models. In contrast, we also find that GPT-4 is less proficient in tasks that require complex reasoning or specific domain knowledge. Our comprehensive analyses of model capabilities (understanding, knowledge, reasoning, and calculation) reveal these models' strengths and limitations, providing valuable insights into future directions for enhancing their general capabilities. By concentrating on tasks pertinent to human cognition and decision-making, our benchmark delivers a more meaningful and robust evaluation of foundation models' performance in real-world scenarios. The data, code, and all model outputs are released in https://github.com/ruixiangcui/AGIEval.
Olmo 3.1 32B Think leads with 89.2%
Best score per model as labs report them in their own cards. Labs pick their own settings, so these compare less cleanly than independent runs.
- 89.2
Olmo 3.1 32B Think
- 88.2
Olmo 3 32B Think
- 88.1
Ring-1T
- 83.4
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash
- 83.4
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash Base
- 83.1
DeepSeek-V4-Pro
- 79.6
DeepSeek-V3
- 78.7
Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B-A55B Base
- 77.8 Granite 4.1 30B
- 75.7
Nemotron 3.5 Super 120B-A12B Base
- 71.6
Llama 3.1-405B
- 70.6 Granite 4.0 H Small
- 68.6
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B-A3B Base
- 68.3
Nemotron 3 Nano 30B-A3B Base
- 68.3
OLMo 2 32B Instruct
- 66.2
Gemma 3 27B
- 65.8
Mistral Small 3
- 64.6
Llama 3.1-70B
- 63.0
Llama 3-70B
- 61.4
DeepSeek-V2 (MoE-236B, May 2024)
- 57.4
Gemma 3 12B
- 55.1
Gemma 2 27B
- 54.2
Llama 2-70B
- 53.7 ChatGLM3-6B
- 52.8
Gemma 2 9B
- 50.2
phi-3-medium 14B
- 49.2 granite-4.0-1b
- 47.8
Llama 3.1-8B
- 46.4
DeepSeek LLM 67B
- 45.9
Llama 3-8B
- 45.1
phi-3-small 7.4B
- 43.4
Llama 2-34B
- 42.1
Gemma 3 4B
- 41.7
Gemma 7B
- 40.5
Apertus 70B
- 39.1
Llama 2-13B
- 37.5
phi-3-mini 3.8B
- 30.0
AFM-4.5B
- 29.3
Llama 2-7B
- 24.2
Gemma 2B
- 1
Olmo 3.1 32B Think 89.2%
- 2
Olmo 3 32B Think 88.2%
- 3
Ring-1T 88.1%
- 4
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 83.4%
- 5
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash Base 83.4%
- 6
DeepSeek-V4-Pro 83.1%
- 7
DeepSeek-V3 79.6%
- 8
Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B-A55B Base 78.7%
- 9 Granite 4.1 30B 77.8%
- 10
Nemotron 3.5 Super 120B-A12B Base 75.7%
- 11
Llama 3.1-405B 71.6%
- 12 Granite 4.0 H Small 70.6%
- 13
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B-A3B Base 68.6%
- 14
Nemotron 3 Nano 30B-A3B Base 68.3%
- 15
OLMo 2 32B Instruct 68.3%
- 16
Gemma 3 27B 66.2%
- 17
Mistral Small 3 65.8%
- 18
Llama 3.1-70B 64.6%
- 19
Llama 3-70B 63%
- 20
DeepSeek-V2 (MoE-236B, May 2024) 61.4%
- 21
Gemma 3 12B 57.4%
- 22
Gemma 2 27B 55.1%
- 23
Llama 2-70B 54.2%
- 24 ChatGLM3-6B 53.7%
- 25
Gemma 2 9B 52.8%
- 26
phi-3-medium 14B 50.2%
- 27 granite-4.0-1b 49.2%
- 28
Llama 3.1-8B 47.8%
- 29
DeepSeek LLM 67B 46.4%
- 30
Llama 3-8B 45.9%
- 31
phi-3-small 7.4B 45.1%
- 32
Llama 2-34B 43.4%
- 33
Gemma 3 4B 42.1%
- 34
Gemma 7B 41.7%
- 35
Apertus 70B 40.5%
- 36
Llama 2-13B 39.1%
- 37
phi-3-mini 3.8B 37.5%
- 38
AFM-4.5B 30%
- 39
Llama 2-7B 29.3%
- 40
Gemma 2B 24.2%
Source: Labs’ model cards
| # | Model | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | | 89.2% | Dec 2025 | Lab model card | |
| 2 | | 88.2% | Nov 2025 | Lab model card | |
| 3 | | 88.1% | Oct 2025 | Lab model card | |
| 4 | | 83.4% | Sep 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 5 | | 83.4% | Sep 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 6 | | 83.1% | Apr 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 7 | | 79.6% | Dec 2024 | Lab model card | |
| 8 | | 78.7% | Jun 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 9 | Granite 4.1 30B | 77.8% | Apr 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 10 | | 75.7% | Oct 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 11 | | 71.6% | Jul 2024 | Lab model card | |
| 12 | Granite 4.0 H Small | 70.6% | Oct 2025 | Lab model card | |
| 13 | | 68.6% | Oct 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 14 | | 68.3% | Dec 2025 | Lab model card | |
| 15 | | 68.3% | Dec 2024 | Lab model card | |
| 16 | | 66.2% | Mar 2025 | Lab model card | |
| 17 | | 65.8% | Jan 2025 | Lab model card | |
| 18 | | 64.6% | Jul 2024 | Lab model card | |
| 19 | | 63% | Apr 2024 | Lab model card | |
| 20 | | 61.4% | May 2024 | Lab model card | |
| 21 | | 57.4% | Mar 2025 | Lab model card | |
| 22 | | 55.1% | Jun 2024 | Lab model card | |
| 23 | | 54.2% | Jul 2023 | Lab model card | |
| 24 | ChatGLM3-6B | 53.7% | Oct 2023 | Lab model card | |
| 25 | | 52.8% | Jul 2024 | Lab model card | |
| 26 | | 50.2% | Aug 2024 | Lab model card | |
| 27 | granite-4.0-1b | 49.2% | Oct 2025 | Lab model card | |
| 28 | | 47.8% | Jul 2024 | Lab model card | |
| 29 | | 46.4% | Jan 2024 | Lab model card | |
| 30 | | 45.9% | Apr 2024 | Lab model card | |
| 31 | | 45.1% | Aug 2024 | Lab model card | |
| 32 | | 43.4% | Jul 2023 | Lab model card | |
| 33 | | 42.1% | Mar 2025 | Lab model card | |
| 34 | | 41.7% | Feb 2024 | Lab model card | |
| 35 | | 40.5% | Sep 2025 | Lab model card | |
| 36 | | 39.1% | Jul 2023 | Lab model card | |
| 37 | | 37.5% | Aug 2024 | Lab model card | |
| 38 | | 30% | Jul 2025 | Lab model card | |
| 39 | | 29.3% | Jul 2023 | Lab model card | |
| 40 | | 24.2% | Mar 2024 | Lab model card |
7 models have held number one in labs’ own numbers since its release in April 2023
Lab claims count from the day the card came out, independent runs from the model’s release.
Source: Labs’ model cards
Ant Group’s own number for Ring-1T passed 85% in October 2025
All the scores we have, one dot each, so a model tested at several settings appears more than once.
Source: Labs’ model cards
Labs headline it less often now, last in September 2026
Launch posts from every lab that has listed it, one tick per post. Tall colored ticks include it, and short gray ones leave it out.
| Date | Launch post | Score | As the post writes it |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 10, 2026 | 83.4 | AGIEval (EM) | |
| Apr 29, 2026 | Granite 4.1 30B | 77.8 | AGI EVAL (0-shot, CoT) |
| Apr 24, 2026 | 83.1 | AGIEval (EM) | |
| Dec 12, 2025 | 89.2 | AGI Eval English | |
| Nov 20, 2025 | 88.2 | AGI Eval English | |
| Oct 28, 2025 | granite-4.0-1b | 49.2 | AGI EVAL (0-shot, CoT) |
| Oct 2, 2025 | Granite 4.0 H Small | 70.6 | AGI EVAL (0-shot, CoT) |
| Jul 29, 2025 | 30 | Agieval | |
| Mar 12, 2025 | 66.2 | AGIEval 3-5-shot (PT) | |
| Jan 30, 2025 | 65.8 | AGIEval [base] | |
| Dec 26, 2024 | 79.6 | AGIEval (Acc.) | |
| Jun 27, 2024 | 55.1 | AGIEval (3-5-shot) | |
| Apr 22, 2024 | 48.4 | AGIEval (0-Shot) | |
| Apr 18, 2024 | 63 | AGIEval English (3-5 shot) [pretrained] | |
| Feb 21, 2024 | 41.7 | AGIEval | |
| Oct 27, 2023 | ChatGLM3-6B | 53.7 | AGIEval |
| Jul 18, 2023 | 54.2 | AGI Eval |
39 system cards report it, from 9 labs
Besides launch posts, we read the system cards, model cards and technical reports labs publish with a release. They report far more, including safety and frontier-risk tests.
| Date | Document | Score | As the document writes it | Section |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 15, 2026 | | 75.7 | AGIEval-En, CoT exact match, Table 6 | Capabilities |
| Oct 15, 2026 | | 68.6 | AGIEval-En, CoT exact match, Table 6 | Capabilities |
| Sep 10, 2026 | | 83.4 | AGIEval, EM, 3-5-shot | Capabilities |
| Jun 4, 2026 | | 78.7 | AGIEval-En, 3/5-shot CoT EM | Capabilities |
| Dec 23, 2025 | | 68.3 | AGIEval-English, 3/5-shot CoT accuracy, base model Table 2 | Capabilities |
| Dec 15, 2025 | | 88.2 | AGI Eval English, Final Think 3.0 column (Table 14) | Capabilities |
| Dec 15, 2025 | | 89.2 | AGI Eval English (Table 1). Table 14 prints 88.8 for Final Think 3.1 | Capabilities |
| Oct 21, 2025 | | 88.1 | AGIEval (Table 1) | Capabilities |
| Sep 17, 2025 | | 40.5 | AGIeval, held-out test suite (Table 21) | Capabilities |
| Mar 25, 2025 | | 42.1 | AGIEval, PT, 3-5-shot (Table 10) | Capabilities |
| Mar 25, 2025 | | 66.2 | AGIEval, PT, 3-5-shot (Table 10) | Capabilities |
| Mar 25, 2025 | | 57.4 | AGIEval, PT, 3-5-shot (Table 10) | Capabilities |
| Dec 31, 2024 | | 68.3 | AGI Eval English, unseen suite (Table 24) | Capabilities |
| Nov 23, 2024 | | 47.8 | AGIEval, pretrained (Table 13) | Capabilities |
| Nov 23, 2024 | | 64.6 | AGIEval, pretrained (Table 13) | Capabilities |
| Nov 23, 2024 | | 71.6 | AGIEval, pretrained (Table 13) | Capabilities |
| Aug 30, 2024 | | 45.1 | AGIEval (0-Shot) (Section 3 table) | Capabilities |
| Aug 30, 2024 | | 37.5 | AGIEval (0-Shot) (Section 3 table) | Capabilities |
| Aug 30, 2024 | | 50.2 | AGIEval (0-Shot) (Section 3 table) | Capabilities |
| Jul 31, 2024 | | 52.8 | AGIEval, PT, 3-5-shot (Table 13) | Capabilities |
| Jul 31, 2024 | | 55.1 | AGIEval, PT, 3-5-shot (Table 13) | Capabilities |
| Jul 23, 2024 | | 47.8 | AGIEval English, 3-5 shot, average/acc_char, pretrained (Base pretrained models table) | Capabilities |
| Jul 23, 2024 | | 64.6 | AGIEval English, 3-5 shot, average/acc_char, pretrained (Base pretrained models table) | Capabilities |
| Jul 23, 2024 | | 71.6 | AGIEval English, 3-5 shot, average/acc_char, pretrained (Base pretrained models table) | Capabilities |
| May 7, 2024 | | 61.4 | AGIEval 0-shot, DeepSeek-V2 Chat (RL) (Table 3) | Capabilities |
| Apr 18, 2024 | | 45.9 | AGIEval English (3-5 shot), pretrained (Base pretrained models table) | Capabilities |
| Apr 18, 2024 | | 63 | AGIEval English (3-5 shot), pretrained (Base pretrained models table) | Capabilities |
| Mar 13, 2024 | | 41.7 | AGIEval (English-only), PT (Table 6) | Capabilities |
| Mar 13, 2024 | | 24.2 | AGIEval (English-only), PT (Table 6) | Capabilities |
| Jan 8, 2024 | | AGI Eval, English multiple-choice, bar chart without printed values (Figure 2) | Capabilities | |
| Jan 5, 2024 | | 46.4 | AGIEval, DeepSeek 67B Chat (Table 6) | Capabilities |
| Oct 10, 2023 | | AGI Eval, English multiple-choice, bar chart without printed values (Figure 4) | Capabilities | |
| Jul 19, 2023 | | 29.3 | AGI Eval English, average (3-5 shot), pretrained (Table 3, Table 24) | Capabilities |
| Jul 19, 2023 | | 54.2 | AGI Eval English, average (3-5 shot), pretrained (Table 3, Table 24) | Capabilities |
| Jul 19, 2023 | | 43.4 | AGI Eval English, average (3-5 shot), pretrained (Table 3, Table 24) | Capabilities |
| Jul 19, 2023 | | 39.1 | AGI Eval English, average (3-5 shot), pretrained (Table 3, Table 24) | Capabilities |
| Jul 18, 2023 | | 29.3 | AGI Eval, pretrained (Overall performance on grouped academic benchmarks) | Capabilities |
| Jul 18, 2023 | | 54.2 | AGI Eval, pretrained (Overall performance on grouped academic benchmarks) | Capabilities |
| Jul 18, 2023 | | 39.1 | AGI Eval, pretrained (Overall performance on grouped academic benchmarks) | Capabilities |
More in Knowledge
- MMLU-Pro In use Harder 10-option version of MMLU with reasoning-focused questions across 14 subjects.
Intern-S2-397B 89.8%
- SuperGPQA In use 26,529 graduate-level multiple-choice questions across 285 disciplines. Accuracy.
Qwen 3.6 Max (Preview) 73.9%
- WideSearch In use 200 bilingual broad info-seeking tasks: agent collects many atomic facts into a table. Scored by success rate and row/item F1.
Tencent Hy4 preview 83.9%
- BBEH micro average In use Models solve harder replacements for each of the 23 BIG-Bench Hard tasks, 4,520 examples in total. The score is the share of all examples answered correctly.
Gemma 4 31B IT 74.4%
- KMMLU-Pro In use Models answer multiple-choice questions taken from Korean National Professional Licensure exams. It tests professional knowledge used in Korean industry.
Solar Pro 4 79.2%
- HLE-Verified In use Verified and revised version of Humanity's Last Exam (1,811 items) with uncertain items removed.
Seed2.0 Pro 73.6%