Benchmark Almanac

EvoArena Terminal-Bench-Evo

GPT-5.5 65.1% leads since June 2026
Not in model cards

Agents solve terminal 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.

Abstract of EvoArena: Tracking Memory Evolution for Robust LLM Agents in Dynamic Environments (arXiv:2606.13681, CC0)
8
Models scored on its own leaderboard

GPT-5.5 leads with 65.1% 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:

  1. 1 GPT-5.5 EvoMem 65.1%
  2. 2 Gemini 3.1 Pro EvoMem 56.5%
  3. 3 GLM-5.1 EvoMem 55.3%
  4. 4 Kimi K2.6 EvoMem 42.9%
  5. 5 MiniMax-M2.7 EvoMem 42.4%
  6. 6 Qwen3.6 27B EvoMem 40.9%
  7. 7 DeepSeek-V4-Pro EvoMem 40.4%
  8. 8 Gemma 4 31B IT EvoMem 24.5%

Source: Official EvoArena Terminal-Bench-Evo leaderboard

#ModelScoreSettingDateSource
1 GPT-5.5 65.1% EvoMem, Terminus 2 Apr 2026 Official leaderboard
2 Gemini 3.1 Pro 56.5% EvoMem, Terminus 2 Feb 2026 Official leaderboard
3 GLM-5.1 55.3% EvoMem, Terminus 2 Apr 2026 Official leaderboard
4 Kimi K2.6 42.9% EvoMem, Terminus 2 Apr 2026 Official leaderboard
5 MiniMax-M2.7 42.4% EvoMem, Terminus 2 Mar 2026 Official leaderboard
6 Qwen3.6 27B 40.9% EvoMem, Terminus 2 Apr 2026 Official leaderboard
7 DeepSeek-V4-Pro 40.4% EvoMem, Terminus 2 Apr 2026 Official leaderboard
8 Gemma 4 31B IT 24.5% EvoMem, Terminus 2 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.

Lowest effort to highest, light to dark
GPT-5.5 Terminus 2
Base
65.1%
Gemini 3.1 Pro Terminus 2
Base
56.5%
GLM-5.1 Terminus 2
Base EvoMem
55.3%
Kimi K2.6 Terminus 2
Base
42.9%
MiniMax-M2.7 Terminus 2
Base
42.4%
Qwen3.6 27B Terminus 2
Base
40.9%
DeepSeek-V4-Pro Terminus 2
Base
40.4%
Gemma 4 31B IT Terminus 2
Base
24.5%

Source: Official EvoArena Terminal-Bench-Evo leaderboard

ModelEffortHarnessScoreCost per taskOutput tokens
GPT-5.5 EvoMem Terminus 2 65.1%
GPT-5.5 Base Terminus 2 62.8%
Gemini 3.1 Pro EvoMem Terminus 2 56.5%
GLM-5.1 EvoMem Terminus 2 55.3%
Gemini 3.1 Pro Base Terminus 2 53.8%
GLM-5.1 Base Terminus 2 51.8%
Kimi K2.6 EvoMem Terminus 2 42.9%
MiniMax-M2.7 EvoMem Terminus 2 42.4%
MiniMax-M2.7 Base Terminus 2 41%
Qwen3.6 27B EvoMem Terminus 2 40.9%
Kimi K2.6 Base Terminus 2 40.8%
DeepSeek-V4-Pro EvoMem Terminus 2 40.4%
Qwen3.6 27B Base Terminus 2 37.6%
DeepSeek-V4-Pro Base Terminus 2 37.3%
Gemma 4 31B IT EvoMem Terminus 2 24.5%
Gemma 4 31B IT Base Terminus 2 23.4%

Number one over time

Lab claims count from the day the card came out, independent runs from the model’s release.

OpenAI
Own leaderboard Not tested since Jun 2026
GPT-5.5 65.1%

Source: Official EvoArena Terminal-Bench-Evo leaderboard

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 Best so far
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2026 Near the ceiling (85%) GPT-5.5 Gemini 3.1 Pro 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2026 Near the ceiling (85%) GPT-5.5 Gemini 3.1 Pro

Source: Official EvoArena Terminal-Bench-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

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%
  • 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%