EurekaBench
Agents run long experiments and propose mechanisms that explain observations in six sciences. Mechanisms are scored on known constraints, predictive accuracy and the 306 expert-listed insights they should support.
26 expert-verified tasks across neuroscience, computer science, chemistry, astrophysics, geophysics and plasma physics. Grading of insights is assumed model-judged and should be checked. Repo has 35 stars.
- Made by
- Carnegie Mellon University + Stanford + collaborators
- Released
- September 2026
- Kind
- Research science
- Level
- Research frontier
- Scored
- Graded by a model
- Answers
- Agent task
- Tasks
- All public
- Strongest model tested
- GPT-6 Astra #3 on the capability index
- Last model added
- September 2026
- Scores refreshed
- November 12th, 2026
In the authors’ words
When Isaac Newton discovered the law of gravitation, he did so through an iterative process of analyzing observed data such as planetary patterns, finding the underlying mechanisms by describing patterns in mathematical equations, and refining his theory against the Moon's orbit, revealing the startling insight that the same force governs both falling apples and orbiting planets. Would it be possible for AI agents to make similar discoveries? To measure this ability, we introduce EurekaBench, a cross-domain benchmark that tests AI agents' ability to conduct long-horizon experiments and discover mechanisms that explain observations. We evaluate these mechanisms by the scientific insights that can be derived from them. EurekaBench contains an expert-verified set of 26 long-horizon tasks across neuroscience, computer science, chemistry, astrophysics, geophysics, and plasma physics, with a total of 306 scientific insights that the discovered mechanisms are expected to support. Our evaluation framework tests three axes of scientific discovery: agents' ability to follow known scientific constraints, the predictive accuracy of the discovered mechanisms, and whether these mechanisms yield scientific insights or inform future research. Our results show that current AI agents often overly fixate on predictive accuracy optimization, surpassing human scientists, while falling substantially short in deriving scientific insights.
Claude Fable 5.1 leads with 29.8 among models released by September 2026
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.
The newest model with a score here came out in September 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
- Claude Opus 5.5
- GPT-6.1 Sol
- and 12 more
- 1 Claude Fable 5.1 xhigh 29.8
- 2 GPT-6 Astra xhigh 28.7
- 3 Claude Opus 5 xhigh 27.3
- 4 GPT-5.6 Sol xhigh 19.4
- 5 Claude Opus 4.8 xhigh 18.4
- 6
DeepSeek-V4-Flash xhigh 14.6
- 7 Kimi K3 xhigh 12.9
Source: Official EurekaBench leaderboard
| # | Model | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Claude Fable 5.1 | 29.8 | xhigh, Claude Code | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 2 | GPT-6 Astra | 28.7 | xhigh, Codex | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 3 | Claude Opus 5 | 27.3 | xhigh, Claude Code | Jul 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 4 | GPT-5.6 Sol | 19.4 | xhigh, Codex | Jul 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 5 | Claude Opus 4.8 | 18.4 | xhigh, Claude Code | May 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 6 | | 14.6 | xhigh, OpenHands | Apr 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 7 | Kimi K3 | 12.9 | xhigh, OpenHands | Jul 2026 | 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 EurekaBench 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 EurekaBench 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 Science and reasoning
- GPQA Diamond In use 198 graduate-level 'Google-proof' multiple-choice questions in biology, chemistry and physics.
Gemini 4 Carbon 96.5%
- Terminal-Bench-Science In use 70 scientific research-workflow tasks across five science areas, run in Harbor containers. Hidden tests give the resolution rate. GPT-6 Astra 68.1%
- FrontierScience In use Models solve physics, chemistry, and biology problems in an Olympiad track graded by short answer and a Research track graded by 10-point rubrics.
Intern-S2-397B 87%
- BioMysteryBench In use Bioinformatics problems on anonymized real datasets that require real analysis with tools. Rubric-graded, with human-solvable and human-difficult splits. Claude Fable 5.2 83.7%
- HiPhO In use Models solve theory problems from 2024 and 2025 physics olympiad exams, some with diagrams. Official marking schemes grade answers and steps, mapped to medal levels.
Gemini 3 Pro 78.3%
- LABBench2 In use 11 biology research sub-tasks (literature, figures, tables, patents, trials and more) with tool access. Macro-averaged accuracy. GPT-5.2 60.9%