AthenaBench
Models answer cyber threat intelligence tasks such as threat actor attribution, attack technique extraction, root cause mapping, severity prediction and risk mitigation. It extends CTIBench.
The makers rebuilt the CTIBench data pipeline, removed duplicates, refined metrics and added a risk mitigation task. A public Mini set exists.
- Released
- November 2025
- Kind
- Finding and exploiting real bugs
- Level
- Expert
- Scored
- Checked automatically
- Answers
- Short answer
- Tasks
- All public
- Strongest model tested
- GPT-5 #70 on the capability index
- Last in a system card
- February 2026
- Last model added
- February 2026
- Scores refreshed
- November 12th, 2026
In the authors’ words
Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated strong capabilities in natural language reasoning, yet their application to Cyber Threat Intelligence (CTI) remains limited. CTI analysis involves distilling large volumes of unstructured reports into actionable knowledge, a process where LLMs could substantially reduce analyst workload. CTIBench introduced a comprehensive benchmark for evaluating LLMs across multiple CTI tasks. In this work, we extend CTIBench by developing AthenaBench, an enhanced benchmark that includes an improved dataset creation pipeline, duplicate removal, refined evaluation metrics, and a new task focused on risk mitigation strategies. We evaluate twelve LLMs, including state-of-the-art proprietary models such as GPT-5 and Gemini-2.5 Pro, alongside seven open-source models from the LLaMA and Qwen families. While proprietary LLMs achieve stronger results overall, their performance remains subpar on reasoning-intensive tasks, such as threat actor attribution and risk mitigation, with open-source models trailing even further behind. These findings highlight fundamental limitations in the reasoning capabilities of current LLMs and underscore the need for models explicitly tailored to CTI workflows and automation.
GPT-5 leads with 66.1% among models released by August 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.
The newest model with a score here came out in August 2025, and nobody has tested a newer one. Among the 20 highest-ranked models on the capability index, these have no score yet:
- Claude Fable 5.2
-
Gemini 4 Carbon
- GPT-6 Astra
- Claude Opus 5.5
- and 16 more
- 66.1 GPT-5
- 63.6 Gemini-2.5-pro (snapshot unspecified)
- 58.0 GPT-4o (snapshot unspecified)
- 54.0 Gemini-2.5-flash (snapshot unspecified)
- 51.4 GPT-4 (snapshot unspecified)
- 46.5
Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
- 44.0 Llama 3-70b-Instruct
- 43.7 Llama-Primus-Merged
- 42.7
Qwen3-14B
- 40.1
Qwen3-8B
- 38.8
Llama 3.1-8B
- 37.5
Qwen3-4B
- 1 GPT-5 66.1%
- 2 Gemini-2.5-pro (snapshot unspecified) 63.6%
- 3 GPT-4o (snapshot unspecified) 58%
- 4 Gemini-2.5-flash (snapshot unspecified) 54%
- 5 GPT-4 (snapshot unspecified) 51.4%
- 6
Llama 3.3 70B Instruct 46.5%
- 7 Llama 3-70b-Instruct 44%
- 8 Llama-Primus-Merged 43.7%
- 9
Qwen3-14B 42.7%
- 10
Qwen3-8B 40.1%
- 11
Llama 3.1-8B 38.8%
- 12
Qwen3-4B 37.5%
Source: Official AthenaBench leaderboard
| # | Entry | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | GPT-5 | 66.1% | Aug 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 2 | Gemini-2.5-pro (snapshot unspecified) | 63.6% | Official leaderboard | ||
| 3 | GPT-4o (snapshot unspecified) | 58% | Official leaderboard | ||
| 4 | Gemini-2.5-flash (snapshot unspecified) | 54% | Official leaderboard | ||
| 5 | GPT-4 (snapshot unspecified) | 51.4% | Official leaderboard | ||
| 6 | | 46.5% | Dec 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 7 | Llama 3-70b-Instruct | 44% | Official leaderboard | ||
| 8 | Llama-Primus-Merged | 43.7% | Official leaderboard | ||
| 9 | | 42.7% | Apr 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 10 | | 40.1% | Apr 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 11 | | 38.8% | Jul 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 12 | | 37.5% | Apr 2025 | Official leaderboard |
Number one over time
Lab claims count from the day the card came out, independent runs from the model’s release.
Source: Official AthenaBench leaderboard
Scores over time
All the scores we have, one dot each, so a model tested at several settings appears more than once.
Source: Official AthenaBench leaderboard
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.
One system card reports it
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 28, 2026 | | AthenaBench-Mini, greedy, six tasks with no overall: CKT 85.00, ATE 44.00, RCM 58.50, RMS F1 5.50, VSP 24.50, TAA 8.00 (Table 14) | Cyber risk |
More in Cybersecurity
- ExploitGym In use 869 real-vulnerability exploit-development tasks (userspace, V8, Linux kernel). Success means capturing a flag through the intended vulnerability. GPT-6 Astra 42.4%
- ExploitBench In use 41 recent V8 JavaScript-engine N-day vulnerabilities. Progress measured by 16 grader-verified capability flags across five tiers. GPT-6 Astra 100%
- CyberBench v1.1 (Vals) In use Agents work on OSS-Fuzz memory-safety bugs from ARVO images in two tracks. They write a proof-of-concept input that crashes the target, or patch the source so the crash stops and tests still pass.
Muse Wonder 80.4%
- SRE-Bench In use Software reverse engineering without source: 262 binary instances from 19 private programs, each with six graded objectives. GPT-6 Astra 56.9%
- CyScenarioBench In use Scenario-based long-horizon security challenges in sandboxes, organized in task, scenario and campaign tiers. Evaluation set kept private.
Gemini 4 Argon 100%
- ExploitBench - Internal Port In use Agents develop working exploits for recently disclosed vulnerabilities to limit contamination. Scored as arbitrary code execution success rate. GPT-6 Cyber 42%