AutoResearchBench
Agents search the scientific literature, either tracking down one target paper through multi-step probing or collecting every paper that meets given conditions.
The dataset is an obfuscated bundle to limit contamination. 31 HF paper upvotes.
- Made by
- Lei Xiong, Kun Luo, Zheng Liu et al.
- Released
- April 2026
- Kind
- Deep research
- Level
- Expert
- Scored
- Checked automatically
- Answers
- Agent task
- Tasks
- All public
- Strongest model tested
- GPT-5.4 #27 on the capability index
- Last model added
- March 2026
- Scores refreshed
- November 12th, 2026
In the authors’ words
Autonomous scientific research is significantly advanced thanks to the development of AI agents. One key step in this process is finding the right scientific literature, whether to explore existing knowledge for a research problem, or to acquire evidence for verifying assumptions and supporting claims. To assess AI agents' capability in driving this process, we present AutoResearchBench, a dedicated benchmark for autonomous scientific literature discovery. AutoResearchBench consists of two complementary task types: (1) Deep Research, which requires tracking down a specific target paper through a progressive, multi-step probing process, and (2) Wide Research, which requires comprehensively collecting a set of papers satisfying given conditions. Compared to previous benchmarks on agentic web browsing, AutoResearchBench is distinguished along three dimensions: it is research-oriented, calling for in-depth comprehension of scientific concepts; literature-focused, demanding fine-grained utilization of detailed information; and open-ended, involving an unknown number of qualified papers and thus requiring deliberate reasoning and search throughout. These properties make AutoResearchBench uniquely suited for evaluating autonomous research capabilities, and extraordinarily challenging. Even the most powerful LLMs, despite having largely conquered general agentic web-browsing benchmarks such as BrowseComp, achieve only 9.39% accuracy on Deep Research and 9.31% IoU on Wide Research, while many other strong baselines fall below 5%. We publicly release the dataset and evaluation pipeline to facilitate future research in this direction. We publicly release the dataset, evaluation pipeline, and code at https://github.com/CherYou/AutoResearchBench.
GPT Deep Research tops the leaderboard with 22%
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 best model we track is Claude Opus 4.6, at 9.39%.
The newest model with a score here came out in March 2026, 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
- 22.0 GPT Deep Research
- 14.0 AI-studio Gemini-3.1-pro
- 9.39 Claude Opus 4.6
- 7.93
Gemini 3.1 Pro
- 7.44 GPT-5.4
- 6.97
Qwen3.5 397B-A17B
- 6.96 Claude Sonnet 4.6
- 6.80
Seed2.0 Pro
- 4.69 Kimi K2.5
- 4.21
DeepSeek-V3.2
- 3.88
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- 3.24
Qwen3-Max
- 2.91
MiniMax-M2.5
- 2.75
Gemini 3 Flash
- 1.94
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B
- 0.0 Alphaxiv
- 1 GPT Deep Research 22%
- 2 AI-studio Gemini-3.1-pro 14%
- 3 Claude Opus 4.6 9.39%
- 4
Gemini 3.1 Pro 7.93%
- 5 GPT-5.4 7.44%
- 6
Qwen3.5 397B-A17B 6.97%
- 7 Claude Sonnet 4.6 6.96%
- 8
Seed2.0 Pro 6.80%
- 9 Kimi K2.5 4.69%
- 10
DeepSeek-V3.2 4.21%
- 11
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B 3.88%
- 12
Qwen3-Max 3.24%
- 13
MiniMax-M2.5 2.91%
- 14
Gemini 3 Flash 2.75%
- 15
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B 1.94%
- 16 Alphaxiv 0%
Source: Official AutoResearchBench leaderboard
| # | Entry | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | GPT Deep Research | 22% | Official leaderboard | ||
| 2 | AI-studio Gemini-3.1-pro | 14% | Official leaderboard | ||
| 3 | Claude Opus 4.6 | 9.39% | ReAct / DeepXiv | Feb 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 4 | | 7.93% | ReAct / DeepXiv | Feb 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 5 | GPT-5.4 | 7.44% | ReAct / DeepXiv | Mar 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 6 | | 6.97% | ReAct / DeepXiv | Feb 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 7 | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | 6.96% | ReAct / DeepXiv | Feb 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 8 | | 6.80% | ReAct / DeepXiv | Feb 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 9 | Kimi K2.5 | 4.69% | ReAct / DeepXiv | Jan 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 10 | | 4.21% | ReAct / DeepXiv | Dec 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 11 | | 3.88% | ReAct / DeepXiv | Feb 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 12 | | 3.24% | ReAct / DeepXiv | Sep 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 13 | | 2.91% | ReAct / DeepXiv | Feb 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 14 | | 2.75% | ReAct / DeepXiv | Dec 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 15 | | 1.94% | ReAct / DeepXiv | Feb 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 16 | Alphaxiv | 0% | 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 AutoResearchBench 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 AutoResearchBench 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 Tool use
- AutomationBench In use Agent completes end-to-end business workflows inside a simulated company exposing dozens of REST APIs. Graded on resulting state.
Gemini 4 Carbon 53.9%
- MCP Atlas In use Multi-step workflows over real MCP servers. Scores tool-use competency on realistic tasks.
Gemini 4 Argon 90.7%
- BFCL V4 In use Models call functions and tools, including multi-turn agentic tasks with web search and memory. Checked against expected calls and outcomes.
Qwen3.7-Max 75%
- τ³-bench Banking In use Agents act as banking customer-service reps over many turns with a simulated user, following policy. Pass^1 on the final database state.
Qwen 3.8 Max 55.1%
- Toolathlon-Verified In use 108 long-horizon tasks across 32 apps through about 600 MCP tools. Execution-based checkers inspect final environment state. GLM-5.3-Flash 78.4%
- DeepSearchQA In use Questions that need multi-step search and synthesis. Final answers graded against references. Kimi K3 95%