DeR2 Bench
Models reason over supplied scientific documents in a sandbox that separates evidence access from reasoning. Four regimes range from instructions only to relevant documents plus distractors.
The Seed2.0 card groups it under context learning. Scoring and format fields are guesses from the abstract.
- Made by
- ByteDance Seed and collaborators (Ying et al.)
- Released
- January 2026
- Kind
- Deep research
- Level
- Expert
- Scored
- Checked automatically
- Answers
- Short answer
- Strongest model tested
- GPT-5.2 #50 on the capability index
- Last in a launch post
- February 2026, dropped before it saturated
- Last model added
- February 2026
- Scores refreshed
- November 12th, 2026
In the authors’ words
Despite strong performance on existing benchmarks, it remains unclear whether large language models can reason over genuinely novel scientific information. Most evaluations score end-to-end RAG pipelines, where reasoning is confounded with retrieval and toolchain choices, and the signal is further contaminated by parametric memorization and open-web volatility. We introduce DeR2, a controlled deep-research sandbox that isolates document-grounded reasoning while preserving core difficulties of deep search: multi-step synthesis, denoising, and evidence-based conclusion making. DeR2 decouples evidence access from reasoning via four regimes–Instruction-only, Concepts (gold concepts without documents), Related-only (only relevant documents), and Full-set (relevant documents plus topically related distractors)–yielding interpretable regime gaps that operationalize retrieval loss vs. reasoning loss and enable fine-grained error attribution. To prevent parametric leakage, we apply a two-phase validation that requires parametric failure without evidence while ensuring oracle-concept solvability. To ensure reproducibility, each instance provides a frozen document library (drawn from 2023-2025 theoretical papers) with expert-annotated concepts and validated rationales. Experiments across a diverse set of state-of-the-art foundation models reveal substantial variation and significant headroom: some models exhibit mode-switch fragility, performing worse with the Full-set than with Instruction-only, while others show structural concept misuse, correctly naming concepts but failing to execute them as procedures.
GPT-5.2 leads with 83.8% among models released by December 2025
Best score per model 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.
GPT-5.2 leads with 83.8%, 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 December 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
- 1 GPT-5.2 Concepts-Only; high 83.8%
- 2 GPT-5.1 Concepts-Only; high 81.4%
- 3
Gemini 3 Pro Concepts-Only 80.9%
- 4
DeepSeek-V3.2 Concepts-Only; Thinking 75.3%
- 5 Claude Opus 4.1 Concepts-Only; thinking 72.4%
Source: Official DeR2 Bench leaderboard
- 1 GPT-5.2 Concepts-Only; high 83.8%
- 2 GPT-5.1 Concepts-Only; high 81.4%
- 3
Gemini 3 Pro Concepts-Only 80.9%
- 4
DeepSeek-V3.2 Concepts-Only; Thinking 75.3%
- 5 Claude Opus 4.1 Concepts-Only; thinking 72.4%
- 6
Seed2.0 Pro 58.2%
Sources: Official DeR2 Bench leaderboard and labs’ model cards
| # | Model | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | GPT-5.2 | 83.8% | Concepts-Only; high | Dec 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 2 | GPT-5.1 | 81.4% | Concepts-Only; high | Nov 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 3 | | 80.9% | Concepts-Only | Nov 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 4 | | 75.3% | Concepts-Only; Thinking | Dec 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 5 | Claude Opus 4.1 | 72.4% | Concepts-Only; thinking | Aug 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| # | Model | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | GPT-5.2 | 83.8% | Concepts-Only; high | Dec 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 2 | GPT-5.1 | 81.4% | Concepts-Only; high | Nov 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 3 | | 80.9% | Concepts-Only | Nov 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 4 | | 75.3% | Concepts-Only; Thinking | Dec 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 5 | Claude Opus 4.1 | 72.4% | Concepts-Only; thinking | Aug 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 6 | | 58.2% | Feb 2026 | Lab model card |
Labs report scores for 1 model in their cards. Switch the scores above to rank them together.
More effort adds a median 24 points
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.
Source: Official DeR2 Bench leaderboard
| Model | Effort | Harness | Score | Cost per task | Output tokens |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GPT-5.2 | Concepts-Only; high | 83.8% | |||
| GPT-5.1 | Concepts-Only; high | 81.4% | |||
| | Concepts-Only | 80.9% | |||
| | Concepts-Only; Thinking | 75.3% | |||
| Claude Opus 4.1 | Concepts-Only; thinking | 72.4% | |||
| GPT-5.2 | Related-Only; high | 71.4% | |||
| GPT-5.2 | Full-Set; high | 71.1% | |||
| | Related-Only | 68.3% | |||
| GPT-5.1 | Related-Only; high | 66.9% | |||
| GPT-5.2 | Instruction-Only; high | 65.8% | |||
| | Instruction-Only | 64.2% | |||
| | Related-Only; Thinking | 61.3% | |||
| GPT-5.1 | Instruction-Only; high | 59.8% | |||
| | Instruction-Only; Thinking | 57.6% | |||
| GPT-5.1 | Full-Set; high | 57% | |||
| | Full-Set | 53.7% | |||
| Claude Opus 4.1 | Related-Only; thinking | 52% | |||
| Claude Opus 4.1 | Instruction-Only; thinking | 49.3% | |||
| | Full-Set; Thinking | 49.3% | |||
| Claude Opus 4.1 | Full-Set; thinking | 40% |
Number one over time Number one over time
Lab claims count from the day the card came out, independent runs from the model’s release.
Source: Official DeR2 Bench leaderboard
Scores over time
All the scores we have, one dot each, so a model tested at several settings appears more than once.
Sources: Official DeR2 Bench leaderboard and labs’ model cards
Labs headline it less often now, last in February 2026
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 14, 2026 | 58.2 | DeR2 Bench |
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 14, 2026 | | 58.2 | DeR2 Bench (Table 3) | Capabilities |
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%