BBEH micro average
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.
The board ranks by the harmonic mean over tasks, which the BIG-Bench Extra Hard record holds. Labs print this number. Some cards don't name the average and are filed here because every card that names it uses the micro average.
- Made by
- Google DeepMind
- Released
- February 2025
- Kind
- Language reasoning
- Level
- University
- Scored
- Checked automatically
- Answers
- Short answer
- Tasks
- All public
- Strongest model tested
-
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash #34 on the capability index
- Last in a launch post
- September 2026
- Last model added
- September 2026
- Scores refreshed
- November 12th, 2026
In the authors’ words
Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in everyday applications, demanding robust general reasoning capabilities and diverse reasoning skillset. However, current LLM reasoning benchmarks predominantly focus on mathematical and coding abilities, leaving a gap in evaluating broader reasoning proficiencies. One particular exception is the BIG-Bench dataset, which has served as a crucial benchmark for evaluating the general reasoning capabilities of LLMs, thanks to its diverse set of challenging tasks that allowed for a comprehensive assessment of general reasoning across various skills within a unified framework. However, recent advances in LLMs have led to saturation on BIG-Bench, and its harder version BIG-Bench Hard (BBH). State-of-the-art models achieve near-perfect scores on many tasks in BBH, thus diminishing its utility. To address this limitation, we introduce BIG-Bench Extra Hard (BBEH), a new benchmark designed to push the boundaries of LLM reasoning evaluation. BBEH replaces each task in BBH with a novel task that probes a similar reasoning capability but exhibits significantly increased difficulty. We evaluate various models on BBEH and observe a (harmonic) average accuracy of 9.8% for the best general-purpose model and 44.8% for the best reasoning-specialized model, indicating substantial room for improvement and highlighting the ongoing challenge of achieving robust general reasoning in LLMs. We release BBEH publicly at: https://github.com/google-deepmind/bbeh.
Gemma 4 31B IT leads with 74.4% among models released by September 2026
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.
o3-mini leads with 54.2% across all independent runs
Best score per model across the official leaderboard, Epoch AI’s own runs and any board Epoch AI copied. Each bar and row names its source.
Gemma 4 31B IT leads with 74.4%, 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 2026, and nobody has reported 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
- Claude Opus 5.5
- GPT-6.1 Sol
- and 16 more
- 1
Gemma 4 31B IT 74.4%
- 2
ERNIE 5.0 66.6%
- 3
Gemma 4 26B A4B 64.8%
- 4
Ring-1T 59.6%
- 5
Gemma 4 12B 53%
- 6
Ling-2.6-1T 52.4%
- 7
DiffusionGemma 26B A4B 47.6%
- 8
Gemma 4 E4B 33.1%
- 9
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 27.2%
- 10
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash Base 27.2%
- 11
Gemma 4 E2B 21.9%
- 12
Gemma 3 27B 19.3%
- 13
Gemma 3 12B 16.3%
- 14
Gemma 3 4B 11%
- 15
Gemma 3 1B 7.20%
Source: Labs’ model cards
- 1 o3-mini high 54.2%
- 2
DeepSeek-R1 34.9%
- 3
Gemini 2.0 Flash Feb 2025 23.9%
- 4 GPT-4o Jan 2025 22.3%
- 5
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite 19.7%
- 6
DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B 19.2%
- 7
Gemma 3 27B 18.8%
- 8
Gemma 3 12B 16.3%
- 9
Gemma 2 27B 14.8%
- 10
Gemma 3 4B 11%
- 11
Llama 3.1-8B 10.6%
Source: Official BBEH micro average leaderboard
- 74.4
Gemma 4 31B IT
- 66.6
ERNIE 5.0
- 64.8
Gemma 4 26B A4B
- 59.6
Ring-1T
- 54.2 o3-mini
- 53.0
Gemma 4 12B
- 52.4
Ling-2.6-1T
- 47.6
DiffusionGemma 26B A4B
- 34.9
DeepSeek-R1
- 33.1
Gemma 4 E4B
- 27.2
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash
- 27.2
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash Base
- 23.9
Gemini 2.0 Flash
- 22.3 GPT-4o
- 21.9
Gemma 4 E2B
- 19.7
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite
- 19.3
Gemma 3 27B
- 19.2
DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B
- 16.3
Gemma 3 12B
- 14.8
Gemma 2 27B
- 11.0
Gemma 3 4B
- 10.6
Llama 3.1-8B
- 7.20
Gemma 3 1B
- 1
Gemma 4 31B IT 74.4%
- 2
ERNIE 5.0 66.6%
- 3
Gemma 4 26B A4B 64.8%
- 4
Ring-1T 59.6%
- 5 o3-mini high 54.2%
- 6
Gemma 4 12B 53%
- 7
Ling-2.6-1T 52.4%
- 8
DiffusionGemma 26B A4B 47.6%
- 9
DeepSeek-R1 34.9%
- 10
Gemma 4 E4B 33.1%
- 11
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 27.2%
- 12
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash Base 27.2%
- 13
Gemini 2.0 Flash Feb 2025 23.9%
- 14 GPT-4o Jan 2025 22.3%
- 15
Gemma 4 E2B 21.9%
- 16
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite 19.7%
- 17
Gemma 3 27B 19.3%
- 18
DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B 19.2%
- 19
Gemma 3 12B 16.3%
- 20
Gemma 2 27B 14.8%
- 21
Gemma 3 4B 11%
- 22
Llama 3.1-8B 10.6%
- 23
Gemma 3 1B 7.20%
Sources: Labs’ model cards and official BBEH micro average leaderboard
| # | Model | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | | 74.4% | Apr 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 2 | | 66.6% | Feb 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 3 | | 64.8% | Apr 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 4 | | 59.6% | Oct 2025 | Lab model card | |
| 5 | | 53% | Jun 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 6 | | 52.4% | Jun 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 7 | | 47.6% | Jun 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 8 | | 33.1% | Apr 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 9 | | 27.2% | Sep 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 10 | | 27.2% | Sep 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 11 | | 21.9% | Apr 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 12 | | 19.3% | Mar 2025 | Lab model card | |
| 13 | | 16.3% | Mar 2025 | Lab model card | |
| 14 | | 11% | Mar 2025 | Lab model card | |
| 15 | | 7.20% | Mar 2025 | Lab model card |
| # | Model | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | o3-mini | 54.2% | high | Jan 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 2 | | 34.9% | Jan 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 3 | | 23.9% | Feb 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 4 | GPT-4o Jan 2025 | 22.3% | Jan 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 5 | | 19.7% | Feb 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 6 | | 19.2% | Jan 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 7 | | 18.8% | Mar 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 8 | | 16.3% | Mar 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 9 | | 14.8% | Jun 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 10 | | 11% | Mar 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 11 | | 10.6% | Jul 2024 | Official leaderboard |
| # | Model | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | | 74.4% | Apr 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 2 | | 66.6% | Feb 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 3 | | 64.8% | Apr 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 4 | | 59.6% | Oct 2025 | Lab model card | |
| 5 | o3-mini | 54.2% | high | Jan 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 6 | | 53% | Jun 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 7 | | 52.4% | Jun 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 8 | | 47.6% | Jun 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 9 | | 34.9% | Jan 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 10 | | 33.1% | Apr 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 11 | | 27.2% | Sep 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 12 | | 27.2% | Sep 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 13 | | 23.9% | Feb 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 14 | GPT-4o Jan 2025 | 22.3% | Jan 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 15 | | 21.9% | Apr 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 16 | | 19.7% | Feb 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 17 | | 19.3% | Mar 2025 | Lab model card | |
| 18 | | 19.2% | Jan 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 19 | | 16.3% | Mar 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 20 | | 14.8% | Jun 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 21 | | 11% | Mar 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 22 | | 10.6% | Jul 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 23 | | 7.20% | Mar 2025 | Lab model card |
The benchmark's own leaderboard has 11 models. Switch the scores above to rank them together.
4 models have held number one in labs’ own numbers since its release in February 2025 Number one over time 4 models have held number one with claims included since its release in February 2025
Lab claims count from the day the card came out, independent runs from the model’s release. We draw one row each for the benchmark’s own leaderboard and what labs claim in their cards.
Sources: Official BBEH micro average leaderboard and labs’ model cards
Scores over time
All the scores we have, one dot each, so a model tested at several settings appears more than once.
Sources: Official BBEH micro average leaderboard and labs’ model cards
2 labs put it in a launch post in the last six months
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 | 27.2 | BBEH (EM) | |
| Jun 10, 2026 | 47.6 | BigBench Extra Hard | |
| Jun 3, 2026 | 53 | BigBench Extra Hard | |
| Apr 2, 2026 | 33.1 | BigBench Extra Hard | |
| Apr 2, 2026 | 21.9 | BigBench Extra Hard | |
| Apr 2, 2026 | 64.8 | BigBench Extra Hard | |
| Apr 2, 2026 | 74.4 | BigBench Extra Hard | |
| Feb 6, 2026 | 66.6 | BBEH | |
| Mar 12, 2025 | 19.3 | BIG-Bench Extra Hard 0-shot (IT) |
13 system cards report it, from 4 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 10, 2026 | | 27.2 | BBEH, EM, 1-shot | Capabilities |
| Jul 31, 2026 | | 47.6 | BigBench EH, TD, 40.0 no-think (Table 3) | Capabilities |
| Jul 24, 2026 | | 33.1 | Big Bench Extra Hard micro avg, thinking (Table 5) | Capabilities |
| Jul 24, 2026 | | 21.9 | Big Bench Extra Hard micro avg, thinking (Table 5) | Capabilities |
| Jul 24, 2026 | | 74.4 | Big Bench Extra Hard micro avg, thinking (Table 5) | Capabilities |
| Jul 24, 2026 | | 64.8 | Big Bench Extra Hard micro avg, thinking (Table 5) | Capabilities |
| Jun 13, 2026 | | 52.4 | bbeh, Pass@1 (Table 5) | Capabilities |
| Feb 4, 2026 | | 66.6 | BBEH (Table 2) | Capabilities |
| Oct 21, 2025 | | 59.6 | BBEH (Table 1) | Capabilities |
| Mar 25, 2025 | | 11 | BBEH, IT, 0-shot (Table 18) | Capabilities |
| Mar 25, 2025 | | 19.3 | BBEH, IT, 0-shot (Table 18) | Capabilities |
| Mar 25, 2025 | | 7.2 | BBEH, IT, 0-shot (Table 18) | Capabilities |
| Mar 25, 2025 | | 16.3 | BBEH, IT, 0-shot (Table 18) | Capabilities |
3 lab claims next to the leaderboard
Each score a lab reported for its own model, beside the same model's best score on the leaderboard. Gaps mostly come from different harnesses, effort levels and task subsets. 2 of them match, which usually means one side copied the other. Every benchmark.
| Model | Lab says | Board says | Gap |
|---|---|---|---|
| | 19.3% BIG-Bench Extra Hard 0-shot (IT) | 18.8% Leaderboard | +0.5 pts |
| | 16.3% BBEH, IT, 0-shot (Table 18) | 16.3% Leaderboard | Same |
| | 11% BBEH, IT, 0-shot (Table 18) | 11% Leaderboard | Same |
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%
- 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%
- HLE-Diamond In use Models answer 1,000 cleaned expert questions from Humanity's Last Exam, 500 on reasoning and 500 on knowledge, closed book. Graded on exact answers. Claude Fable 5.2 77.9%