Benchmark Almanac

AIRS-Bench

gpt-oss-120b 0.40 leads since February 2026
Muse Spark 1.1 0.77 leads since July 2026
Only in system cards

Agents carry out 20 AI research tasks taken from recent ML papers, without baseline code. Scores are normalized so that 1.0 matches the published human state of the art.

Meta reports a valid submission rate and an average normalized score.

Released
February 2026
Kind
AI research tasks
Level
Research frontier
Scored
Checked automatically
Answers
Agent task
Tasks
All public
Strongest model tested
Muse Spark 1.1 #47 on the capability index
Last in a system card
July 2026
Last model added
July 2026
Scores refreshed
November 12th, 2026

In the authors’ words

LLM agents hold significant promise for advancing scientific research. To accelerate this progress, we introduce AIRS-Bench (the AI Research Science Benchmark), a suite of 20 tasks sourced from state-of-the-art machine learning papers. These tasks span diverse domains, including language modeling, mathematics, bioinformatics, and time series forecasting. AIRS-Bench tasks assess agentic capabilities over the full research lifecycle – including idea generation, experiment analysis and iterative refinement – without providing baseline code. The AIRS-Bench task format is versatile, enabling easy integration of new tasks and rigorous comparison across different agentic frameworks. We establish baselines using frontier models paired with both sequential and parallel scaffolds. Our results show that agents exceed human SOTA in four tasks but fail to match it in sixteen others. Even when agents surpass human benchmarks, they do not reach the theoretical performance ceiling for the underlying tasks. These findings indicate that AIRS-Bench is far from saturated and offers substantial room for improvement. We open-source the AIRS-Bench task definitions and evaluation code to catalyze further development in autonomous scientific research.

Abstract of AIRS-Bench: a Suite of Tasks for Frontier AI Research Science Agents (arXiv:2602.06855, CC0)
6
Entries on its own leaderboard, 5 models we track
2
System cards report it, from 1 lab

gpt-oss-120b leads with 0.40 among models released by September 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. Names in gray aren't in our model list: fine-tunes, agent systems, products and older models. They don't count toward leaders.

Muse Spark 1.1 leads with 0.77, claims included

Best score per model from every source, including labs’ own numbers and claims Epoch AI collected from reports and papers. Labs pick their own settings, so a claim can beat an independent run of the same model.

The newest model with a score here came out in September 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 gpt-oss-120b 0.40
  2. 2 gpt-oss-20b 0.40
  3. 3 o3-mini 0.39
  4. 4 GPT-4o (snapshot unspecified) 0.31
  5. 5 Code World Model (CWM) 0.30
  6. 6 Devstral Small 1.0 0.18

Source: Official AIRS-Bench leaderboard

#EntryScoreSettingDateSource
1 gpt-oss-120b 0.40 Greedy Aug 2025 Official leaderboard
2 gpt-oss-20b 0.40 Greedy Aug 2025 Official leaderboard
3 o3-mini 0.39 Greedy Jan 2025 Official leaderboard
4 GPT-4o (snapshot unspecified) 0.31 Greedy Feb 2026 Official leaderboard
5 Code World Model (CWM) 0.30 MLGym Sep 2025 Official leaderboard
6 Devstral Small 1.0 0.18 Greedy May 2025 Official leaderboard
#ModelScoreSettingDateSource
1 Muse Spark 1.1 0.77 Jul 2026 Lab model card
2 Muse Spark 0.65 Jun 2026 Lab model card
3 gpt-oss-120b 0.40 Greedy Aug 2025 Official leaderboard
4 gpt-oss-20b 0.40 Greedy Aug 2025 Official leaderboard
5 o3-mini 0.39 Greedy Jan 2025 Official leaderboard
6 Code World Model (CWM) 0.30 MLGym Sep 2025 Official leaderboard
7 Devstral Small 1.0 0.18 Greedy May 2025 Official leaderboard

Labs report scores for 2 models in their cards. Switch the scores above to rank them together.

Number one over time 3 models have held number one with claims included since its release in February 2026

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

OpenAI
Own leaderboard Not tested since Feb 2026

Source: Official AIRS-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 Reported by the lab in its model card
0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 2025 2026 0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 2025 2026

Sources: Official AIRS-Bench leaderboard and labs’ model cards

Labs report it only in system cards

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

2 system cards report it, from 1 lab

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.

DateDocumentScoreAs the document writes itSection
Jul 9, 2026 Muse Spark 1.1 system card 0.77 AIRS-Bench average normalized score, Muse Spark 1.1 (Table 6). Table 1 shows 77.0. Valid submission rate 99.00 AI R&D risk
Jun 12, 2026 Muse Spark system card 0.65 AIRS-Bench average normalized score (Table 12). Table 1 shows 64.8 as ANS x 100 AI R&D risk

More in AI research

All 104 in AI research
  • PaperBench In use Agent replicates ICML 2024 papers from scratch. LLM judge grades against author-written hierarchical rubrics. Qwen 3.8 Max 93%
  • MLS-Bench In use Agent must invent one algorithmic change in an ML research scaffold whose gain transfers across settings. Scored relative to human baselines. Claude Fable 5.1 50.3%
  • PostTrainBench 1.2 In use CLI agent gets a base model, one H100 and a time budget to post-train it for a target benchmark. Scored on normalized gain. Claude Fable 5.1 44.6%
  • MLE-bench In use Kaggle-style ML engineering competitions. Agent trains models and is scored against competition leaderboards. GPT-6 Astra 93.8%
  • KernelBench In use Replace PyTorch operators with faster custom GPU kernels. Scored on correctness and speedup. MiniMax-M3 28.8%
  • PMPP-Hard In use Agents write GPU kernels for 69 tasks that must be correct, and on 48 of them also run within 1.25 times the reference time. The score is the area under the solved-tasks curve over a 10-hour budget, out of 690 task-hours. Inkling 2 Small 494.3