EvoArena SWE-Chain-Evo
Agents solve software tasks that change across versions. The score is the published accuracy across versioned tasks.
One track of EvoArena. The EvoArena record keeps lab scores that combine tracks.
- Made by
- MIT
- Released
- June 2026
- Kind
- Learning from the context
- Level
- Expert
- Scored
- Checked automatically
- Answers
- Agent task
- Tasks
- All public
- Strongest model tested
- GPT-5.5 #20 on the capability index
- Last model added
- April 2026
- Scores refreshed
- November 12th, 2026
In the authors’ words
Large language model (LLM) agents have achieved strong performance on a wide range of benchmarks, yet most evaluations assume static environments. In contrast, real-world deployment is inherently dynamic, requiring agents to continually align their knowledge, skills, and behavior with changing environments and updated task conditions. To address this gap, we introduce EvoArena, a benchmark suite that models environment changes as sequences of progressive updates across terminal, software, and social domains. We further propose EvoMem, a patch-based memory paradigm that records memory evolution as structured update histories, enabling agents to reason about environmental evolution through changes in their memory. Experiments show that current agents struggle on EvoArena, achieving an average accuracy of 39.6% across evolving terminal, software, and social-preference domains. EvoMem consistently improves performance, yielding an average gain of 1.5% on EvoArena and also improving standard benchmarks such as GAIA and LoCoMo by 6.1% and 4.8%. Beyond individual tasks, EvoMem further improves chain-level accuracy by 3.7% on EvoArena, where success requires completing a consecutive sequence of related evolutionary subtasks. Mechanistic analysis shows that EvoMem improves evidence capture in the memory, indicating better preservation of complete evolving environment states. Our results highlight the importance of modeling evolution in both evaluation and memory for reliable agent deployment.
GPT-5.5 leads with 50.9% among models released by April 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. Every run is in the next chart.
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:
- Claude Fable 5.2
-
Gemini 4 Carbon
- GPT-6 Astra
- Claude Opus 5.5
- and 15 more
- 1 GPT-5.5 EvoMem 50.9%
- 2
MiniMax-M2.7 EvoMem 42.3%
- 3 GLM-5.1 EvoMem 36.1%
- 4 Kimi K2.6 Base 30.2%
- 5
DeepSeek-V4-Pro EvoMem 27.7%
- 6
Gemini 3.1 Pro Base 20.5%
- 7
Gemma 4 31B IT EvoMem 12%
- 8
Qwen3.6 27B Base 11.6%
Source: Official EvoArena SWE-Chain-Evo leaderboard
| # | Model | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | GPT-5.5 | 50.9% | EvoMem, OpenHands | Apr 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 2 | | 42.3% | EvoMem, OpenHands | Mar 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 3 | GLM-5.1 | 36.1% | EvoMem, OpenHands | Apr 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 4 | Kimi K2.6 | 30.2% | Base, OpenHands | Apr 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 5 | | 27.7% | EvoMem, OpenHands | Apr 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 6 | | 20.5% | Base, OpenHands | Feb 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 7 | | 12% | EvoMem, OpenHands | Apr 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 8 | | 11.6% | Base, OpenHands | Apr 2026 | Official leaderboard |
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.
Source: Official EvoArena SWE-Chain-Evo leaderboard
| Model | Effort | Harness | Score | Cost per task | Output tokens |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GPT-5.5 | EvoMem | OpenHands | 50.9% | ||
| GPT-5.5 | Base | OpenHands | 49.7% | ||
| | EvoMem | OpenHands | 42.3% | ||
| | Base | OpenHands | 41.4% | ||
| GLM-5.1 | EvoMem | OpenHands | 36.1% | ||
| GLM-5.1 | Base | OpenHands | 34.9% | ||
| Kimi K2.6 | Base | OpenHands | 30.2% | ||
| | EvoMem | OpenHands | 27.7% | ||
| Kimi K2.6 | EvoMem | OpenHands | 27.6% | ||
| | Base | OpenHands | 26.7% | ||
| | Base | OpenHands | 20.5% | ||
| | EvoMem | OpenHands | 18.1% | ||
| | EvoMem | OpenHands | 12% | ||
| | Base | OpenHands | 11.6% | ||
| | EvoMem | OpenHands | 11.6% | ||
| | Base | OpenHands | 8.50% |
Number one over time
Lab claims count from the day the card came out, independent runs from the model’s release.
Source: Official EvoArena SWE-Chain-Evo 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 EvoArena SWE-Chain-Evo 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 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%
- CL-bench In use Model must learn new knowledge from a supplied long context (rules, procedures, data) and solve tasks. Strict LLM-verified rubrics. GPT-5.4 27.9%
- 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%