Benchmark Almanac

CL-bench

GPT-5.4 27.9% leads since March 2026
GPT-5.4 27.9% leads since March 2026
In use

Model must learn new knowledge from a supplied long context (rules, procedures, data) and solve tasks. Strict LLM-verified rubrics.

500 contexts, 1,899 tasks, 31,607 rubrics. Follow-up CL-bench Life (2026-04) covers everyday contexts.

Released
February 2026
Kind
Learning from the context
Level
University
Scored
Graded by a model
Answers
Open-ended
Tasks
All public
Strongest model tested
GPT-5.4 #27 on the capability index
Last in a launch post
July 2026
Last model added
July 2026
Scores refreshed
November 12th, 2026

In the authors’ words

Current language models (LMs) excel at reasoning over prompts using pre-trained knowledge. However, real-world tasks are far more complex and context-dependent: models must learn from task-specific context and leverage new knowledge beyond what is learned during pre-training to reason and resolve tasks. We term this capability context learning, a crucial ability that humans naturally possess but has been largely overlooked. To this end, we introduce CL-bench, a real-world benchmark consisting of 500 complex contexts, 1,899 tasks, and 31,607 verification rubrics, all crafted by experienced domain experts. Each task is designed such that the new content required to resolve it is contained within the corresponding context. Resolving tasks in CL-bench requires models to learn from the context, ranging from new domain-specific knowledge, rule systems, and complex procedures to laws derived from empirical data, all of which are absent from pre-training. This goes far beyond long-context tasks that primarily test retrieval or reading comprehension, and in-context learning tasks, where models learn simple task patterns via instructions and demonstrations. Our evaluations of ten frontier LMs find that models solve only 17.2% of tasks on average. Even the best-performing model, GPT-5.1, solves only 23.7%, revealing that LMs have yet to achieve effective context learning, which poses a critical bottleneck for tackling real-world, complex context-dependent tasks. CL-bench represents a step towards building LMs with this fundamental capability, making them more intelligent and advancing their deployment in real-world scenarios.

Abstract of CL-bench: A Benchmark for Context Learning (arXiv:2602.03587, CC0)
28
Entries on its own leaderboard, 24 models we track
6
Launch posts list it, from 4 labs
2
System cards report it, from 2 labs

GPT-5.4 leads with 27.9% among models released by April 2026

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. Every run is in the next chart. Names in gray aren't in our model list: fine-tunes, agent systems, products and older models. They don't count toward leaders.

GPT-5.4 leads with 27.9%, 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 April 2026, 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-5.4 xhigh 27.9%
  2. 2 GPT-5.1 high 23.7%
  3. 3 Polyphony 23.4%
  4. 4 Tencent Hy3 preview 22.8%
  5. 5 Grok 4.20 reasoning 22.2%
  6. 6 Claude Opus 4.5 thinking 21.1%
  7. 7 Gemini 3.1 Pro high 20.8%
  8. 8 Claude Opus 4.6 20.7%
  9. 9 SEED 2.0 (high) 20.6%
  10. 10 Qwen 3.6 Plus 20.3%
  11. 11 Qwen 3.5 Plus (hosted 397B-A17B) thinking 19.8%
  12. 12 Kimi K2.5 19.3%
  13. 13 SEED 2.0 (medium) 18.7%
  14. 14 GLM-5 18.7%
  15. 15 GPT-5.2 18.2%
  16. 16 o3 high 17.8%
  17. 17 Kimi K2 Thinking 17.6%
  18. 18 Tencent HY 2.0 Think 17.2%
  19. 19 Seed1.8 16.1%
  20. 20 GLM-4.7 15.9%
  21. 21 Gemini 3 Pro high 15.8%
  22. 22 MiMo-V2-Pro 15.7%
  23. 23 Hy2.0 15%
  24. 24 Qwen3-Max 14.5%
  25. 25 Doubao-Seed-1.6 thinking 13.4%
  26. 26 DeepSeek-V3.2 thinking 13.2%
  27. 27 Kimi K2 Sep 2025 11.9%
  28. 28 MiniMax-M2.5 11.4%

Source: Official CL-bench leaderboard

#EntryScoreSettingDateSource
1 GPT-5.4 27.9% xhigh Mar 2026 Official leaderboard
2 GPT-5.1 23.7% high Nov 2025 Official leaderboard
3 Polyphony 23.4% Official leaderboard
4 Tencent Hy3 preview 22.8% Apr 2026 Official leaderboard
5 Grok 4.20 22.2% reasoning Feb 2026 Official leaderboard
6 Claude Opus 4.5 21.1% thinking Nov 2025 Official leaderboard
7 Gemini 3.1 Pro 20.8% high Feb 2026 Official leaderboard
8 Claude Opus 4.6 20.7% Feb 2026 Official leaderboard
9 SEED 2.0 (high) 20.6% Official leaderboard
10 Qwen 3.6 Plus 20.3% Mar 2026 Official leaderboard
11 Qwen 3.5 Plus (hosted 397B-A17B) 19.8% thinking Feb 2026 Official leaderboard
12 Kimi K2.5 19.3% Jan 2026 Official leaderboard
13 SEED 2.0 (medium) 18.7% Official leaderboard
14 GLM-5 18.7% Feb 2026 Official leaderboard
15 GPT-5.2 18.2% Dec 2025 Official leaderboard
16 o3 17.8% high Apr 2025 Official leaderboard
17 Kimi K2 Thinking 17.6% Nov 2025 Official leaderboard
18 Tencent HY 2.0 Think 17.2% Dec 2025 Official leaderboard
19 Seed1.8 16.1% Dec 2025 Official leaderboard
20 GLM-4.7 15.9% Dec 2025 Official leaderboard
21 Gemini 3 Pro 15.8% high Nov 2025 Official leaderboard
22 MiMo-V2-Pro 15.7% Mar 2026 Official leaderboard
23 Hy2.0 15% Official leaderboard
24 Qwen3-Max 14.5% Sep 2025 Official leaderboard
25 Doubao-Seed-1.6 13.4% thinking Jun 2025 Official leaderboard
26 DeepSeek-V3.2 13.2% thinking Dec 2025 Official leaderboard
27 Kimi K2 Sep 2025 11.9% Sep 2025 Official leaderboard
28 MiniMax-M2.5 11.4% Feb 2026 Official leaderboard
#ModelScoreSettingDateSource
1 GPT-5.4 27.9% xhigh Mar 2026 Official leaderboard
2 Tencent Hy3 23.8% Jul 2026 Lab model card
3 GPT-5.1 23.7% high Nov 2025 Official leaderboard
4 Tencent Hy3 preview 22.8% Apr 2026 Official leaderboard
5 Grok 4.20 22.2% reasoning Feb 2026 Official leaderboard
6 Claude Opus 4.5 21.1% thinking Nov 2025 Official leaderboard
7 Seed2.0 Pro 20.8% Feb 2026 Lab model card
8 Gemini 3.1 Pro 20.8% high Feb 2026 Official leaderboard
9 Claude Opus 4.6 20.7% Feb 2026 Official leaderboard
10 MiniMax-M3 20.5% Jun 2026 Lab model card
11 Qwen 3.6 Plus 20.3% Mar 2026 Official leaderboard
12 Seed2.0 Lite (0428) 20.1% Apr 2026 Lab model card
13 Qwen 3.5 Plus (hosted 397B-A17B) 19.8% thinking Feb 2026 Official leaderboard
14 Kimi K2.5 19.3% Jan 2026 Official leaderboard
15 GLM-5 18.7% Feb 2026 Official leaderboard
16 GPT-5.2 18.2% Dec 2025 Official leaderboard
17 o3 17.8% high Apr 2025 Official leaderboard
18 Kimi K2 Thinking 17.6% Nov 2025 Official leaderboard
19 Tencent HY 2.0 Think 17.2% Dec 2025 Official leaderboard
20 Seed1.8 16.1% Dec 2025 Official leaderboard
21 GLM-4.7 15.9% Dec 2025 Official leaderboard
22 Gemini 3 Pro 15.8% high Nov 2025 Official leaderboard
23 MiMo-V2-Pro 15.7% Mar 2026 Official leaderboard
24 Qwen3-Max 14.5% Sep 2025 Official leaderboard
25 Doubao-Seed-1.6 13.4% thinking Jun 2025 Official leaderboard
26 DeepSeek-V3.2 13.2% thinking Dec 2025 Official leaderboard
27 Nemotron-Cascade 2 30B-A3B 12.2% Mar 2026 Lab model card
28 Kimi K2 Sep 2025 11.9% Sep 2025 Official leaderboard
29 MiniMax-M2.5 11.4% Feb 2026 Official leaderboard

Labs report scores for 6 models in their cards. Switch the scores above to rank them together.

Scores at each effort level

Models the leaderboard ran at two or more effort levels. We don’t have enough cost data here to say what the extra effort costs.

Lowest effort to highest, light to dark
GPT-5.1
high
23.7%
Grok 4.20
non-reasoni… reasoning
22.2%
Claude Opus 4.5
thinking
21.1%
GPT-5.2
high
18.2%
Gemini 3 Pro
high
15.8%
Qwen3-Max
thinking
14.5%
Doubao-Seed-1.6
thinking
13.4%
DeepSeek-V3.2
thinking
13.2%

Source: Official CL-bench leaderboard

ModelEffortHarnessScoreCost per taskOutput tokens
GPT-5.4 xhigh 27.9%
GPT-5.1 high 23.7%
Tencent Hy3 preview 22.8%
Grok 4.20 reasoning 22.2%
GPT-5.1 21.1%
Claude Opus 4.5 thinking 21.1%
Gemini 3.1 Pro high 20.8%
Claude Opus 4.6 20.7%
Qwen 3.6 Plus 20.3%
Qwen 3.5 Plus (hosted 397B-A17B) thinking 19.8%
Kimi K2.5 19.3%
Claude Opus 4.5 19.1%
GLM-5 18.7%
GPT-5.2 18.2%
GPT-5.2 high 18.1%
o3 high 17.8%
Grok 4.20 non-reasoning 17.7%
Kimi K2 Thinking 17.6%
Tencent HY 2.0 Think 17.2%
Seed1.8 16.1%
GLM-4.7 15.9%
Gemini 3 Pro high 15.8%
MiMo-V2-Pro 15.7%
Gemini 3 Pro 14.8%
Qwen3-Max 14.5%
Qwen3-Max thinking 14.1%
Doubao-Seed-1.6 thinking 13.4%
DeepSeek-V3.2 thinking 13.2%
Doubao-Seed-1.6 13.1%
DeepSeek-V3.2 12.4%
Kimi K2 Sep 2025 11.9%
MiniMax-M2.5 11.4%

2 models have held number one on the official leaderboard since its release in February 2026 2 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. We draw one row each for the benchmark’s own leaderboard and what labs claim in their cards.

OpenAI ByteDance Seed Tencent
Own leaderboard Not tested since Apr 2026
GPT-5.4 27.9%
Lab claims Not tested since Jul 2026
Tencent Hy3 23.8%

Sources: Official CL-bench 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.

On the benchmark’s own leaderboard Reported by the lab in its model card Best so far
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2025 2026 Near the ceiling (85%) GPT-5.4 GPT-5.1 o3 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2025 2026 Near the ceiling (85%) GPT-5.4 o3

Sources: Official CL-bench 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.

ByteDance Seed
NVIDIA
Tencent
MiniMax
DateLaunch postScoreAs the post writes it
Jul 2, 2026 Tencent Hy3 23.8 CL-bench
Jun 1, 2026 MiniMax-M3 20.5 CL-bench
Apr 28, 2026 Seed2.0 Lite (0428) 20.1 CL-Bench
Apr 23, 2026 Tencent Hy3 preview 22.8 CL-bench
Mar 19, 2026 Nemotron-Cascade 2 30B-A3B 12.2 CL-Bench
Feb 14, 2026 Seed2.0 Pro 20.8 CL-Bench

2 system cards report it, from 2 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.

DateDocumentScoreAs the document writes itSection
Mar 19, 2026 Nemotron-Cascade 2 30B-A3B technical report 12.2 CL-Bench (Table 1) Capabilities
Feb 14, 2026 Seed2.0 Pro model card 20.8 CL-Bench (Table 3). Table 13 prints 21.5 Capabilities

One lab claim 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. 1 of them match, which usually means one side copied the other. Every benchmark.

Model Lab says Board says Gap
Tencent Hy3 preview 22.8% CL-bench 22.8% Leaderboard Same

More in Long context

All 79 in Long context
  • MRCR v2 In use Multi-round coreference: retrieve the n-th of several similar requests hidden in a long synthetic conversation, up to 1M tokens. Muse Spark 1.3 98.5%
  • LongBench v2 In use 503 multiple-choice questions over 8K-2M-word contexts (QA, dialogue, code repos, structured data). Accuracy. Inkling 2 Small 70.6%
  • GraphWalks In use A graph is given as an edge list in long context. The model answers BFS or parent queries, scored by F1. Claude Fable 5 99.96%
  • OpenAI MRCR v2 In use Models read a long synthetic chat that hides 2, 4 or 8 identical writing requests and must reproduce the response to the i-th one. Scored by mean string match ratio per context bin. Gemini 3.7 Flash 89%
  • AA-LCR 1.1 In use Models answer 100 questions that need reasoning across sets of real documents of about 100K tokens. An LLM equality checker with a fixed system prompt compares each answer with the key. Step 5 Preview 88.3%
  • LOCA-Bench In use Agentic tasks whose environment state is scaled to grow context length while task semantics stay fixed. Success rate versus context length. GPT-5.2 21.3%