FrontierPhysics
Agents do end-to-end physics research on 56 tasks that 42 physicists from 26 institutions built from their own work, across nine domains of theoretical, computational and experimental physics. Each task asks the agent to review the literature, plan, run the research and write a manuscript. Deterministic verifiers and expert rubrics grade whether the research is correct and publishable, over 3 trials.
The paper (November 2026) tests 22 models in 26 configurations, and no configuration passes more than 46 of its 168 rollouts. Its authors find that agents fall short on rigorous reasoning and expert intuition more than on physics knowledge.
- Made by
- BenchFlow, with physicists from UC Berkeley, Caltech and Harvard
- Released
- August 2026
- Kind
- Research science
- Level
- Expert
- Scored
- Checked automatically
- Answers
- Agent task
- Tasks
- All public
- Strongest model tested
- GPT-6 Astra #3 on the capability index
- Last model added
- October 2026
- Scores refreshed
- November 12th, 2026
In the authors’ words
AI agents are playing an increasingly important role in physics research. However, existing physics benchmarks only evaluate fixed questions, isolated sub-tasks, or paper reproduction with given solutions, and rarely check research quality alongside correctness. We introduce FrontierPhysics, an end-to-end benchmark with 56 tasks made by 42 physicists based on their own research, covering nine domains across theoretical, computational, and experimental physics. Each task requires agents to review the literature, develop a research plan, conduct research and experiments, and produce structured outputs and scientific manuscripts. Combining deterministic verifiers with expert-authored rubrics, FrontierPhysics evaluates whether agents' research is correct and publishable. Across 22 models in 26 configurations, no configuration passes more than 46 of its 168 rollouts. Manual review of agent trajectories shows that frontier agents' main weaknesses are insufficiently rigorous reasoning and limited expert intuition, rather than gaps in physics knowledge or execution errors.
Claude Opus 5.5 leads with 27.4%
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.
- 27.4 Claude Opus 5.5
- 23.2 GPT-6 Astra
- 19.6 GPT-6.1 Sol
- 14.3 GPT-6 Sol
- 14.3 GPT-6.1 Terra
- 11.3 Claude Fable 5.1
- 9.50 Claude Opus 5
- 8.30
Gemini 4 Argon
- 7.10 GPT-5.6 Sol
- 6.50 Kimi K3.1 Pro
- 4.20 GLM-5.3
- 4.20 Grok 4.7
- 4.20 Claude Haiku 5.5
- 3.60 GPT-5.6 Luna
- 3.60 GPT-5.6 Terra
- 3.60
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash
- 2.40 Kimi K3
- 2.40 Grok 4.6
- 1.20 MiMo-V2.6 Pro
- 0.60
DeepSeek-V4-Pro
- 0.0
Gemini 3.8 Flash
- 0.0
Mistral Large 4
- 1 Claude Opus 5.5 27.4%
- 2 GPT-6 Astra max 23.2%
- 3 GPT-6.1 Sol 19.6%
- 4 GPT-6 Sol 14.3%
- 5 GPT-6.1 Terra 14.3%
- 6 Claude Fable 5.1 11.3%
- 7 Claude Opus 5 9.50%
- 8
Gemini 4 Argon 8.30%
- 9 GPT-5.6 Sol max 7.10%
- 10 Kimi K3.1 Pro 6.50%
- 11 GLM-5.3 4.20%
- 12 Grok 4.7 4.20%
- 13 Claude Haiku 5.5 4.20%
- 14 GPT-5.6 Luna max 3.60%
- 15 GPT-5.6 Terra max 3.60%
- 16
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 3.60%
- 17 Kimi K3 2.40%
- 18 Grok 4.6 2.40%
- 19 MiMo-V2.6 Pro 1.20%
- 20
DeepSeek-V4-Pro 0.60%
- 21
Gemini 3.8 Flash 0%
- 22
Mistral Large 4 0%
Source: Official FrontierPhysics leaderboard
| # | Model | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Claude Opus 5.5 | 27.4% | Claude Code | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 2 | GPT-6 Astra | 23.2% | max, Codex | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 3 | GPT-6.1 Sol | 19.6% | Codex | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 4 | GPT-6 Sol | 14.3% | Codex | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 5 | GPT-6.1 Terra | 14.3% | Codex | Oct 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 6 | Claude Fable 5.1 | 11.3% | Claude Code | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 7 | Claude Opus 5 | 9.50% | Claude Code | Jul 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 8 | | 8.30% | Antigravity | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 9 | GPT-5.6 Sol | 7.10% | max, Codex | Jul 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 10 | Kimi K3.1 Pro | 6.50% | Claude Code | Oct 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 11 | GLM-5.3 | 4.20% | Claude Code | Aug 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 12 | Grok 4.7 | 4.20% | Grok Build | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 13 | Claude Haiku 5.5 | 4.20% | Claude Code | Oct 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 14 | GPT-5.6 Luna | 3.60% | max, Codex | Jul 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 15 | GPT-5.6 Terra | 3.60% | max, Codex | Jul 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 16 | | 3.60% | Claude Code | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 17 | Kimi K3 | 2.40% | Claude Code | Jul 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 18 | Grok 4.6 | 2.40% | Grok Build | Aug 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 19 | MiMo-V2.6 Pro | 1.20% | Claude Code | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 20 | | 0.60% | Claude Code | Apr 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 21 | | 0% | Antigravity | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 22 | | 0% | Claude Code | Oct 2026 | Official leaderboard |
Agent Performance
Overall pass rate against the average agent wall-clock time per rollout, on a log scale; the board marks the Pareto frontier. The line joins the runs that no other run beats on both measures. We redrew this chart from the numbers on the official leaderboard.
| Model | Setting | Overall pass rate | Wall-clock per rollout |
|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Opus 5.5 | Claude Code | 27.4% | 146.6 min |
| GPT-6 Astra | max, Codex | 23.2% | 103.6 min |
| GPT-6 Astra | xhigh, Codex | 19.6% | 74.6 min |
| GPT-6.1 Sol | Codex | 19.6% | 107.6 min |
| GPT-6 Sol | Codex | 14.3% | 64.9 min |
| GPT-6.1 Terra | Codex | 14.3% | 68.6 min |
| Claude Fable 5.1 | Claude Code | 11.3% | 111.5 min |
| Claude Opus 5 | Claude Code | 9.5% | 144.2 min |
| | Antigravity | 8.3% | 96.6 min |
| GPT-5.6 Sol | max, Codex | 7.1% | 58.3 min |
| Kimi K3.1 Pro | Claude Code | 6.5% | 90.4 min |
| GPT-5.6 Sol | xhigh, Codex | 4.2% | 25 min |
| Claude Haiku 5.5 | Claude Code | 4.2% | 149.9 min |
| Grok 4.7 | Grok Build | 4.2% | 164.8 min |
| GLM-5.3 | Claude Code | 4.2% | 194.3 min |
| GPT-5.6 Luna | max, Codex | 3.6% | 62.5 min |
| GPT-5.6 Terra | max, Codex | 3.6% | 69 min |
| | Claude Code | 3.6% | 73 min |
| Grok 4.6 | Grok Build | 2.4% | 97.9 min |
| Kimi K3 | Claude Code | 2.4% | 117.1 min |
| GPT-5.6 Luna | xhigh, Codex | 1.8% | 45.1 min |
| GPT-5.6 Terra | xhigh, Codex | 1.2% | 34.8 min |
| MiMo-V2.6 Pro | Claude Code | 1.2% | 180.4 min |
| | Claude Code | 0.6% | 125.8 min |
| | Antigravity | 0% | 27 min |
| | Claude Code | 0% | 288.2 min |
The best score, 27.4%, costs $27 a task
Runs on the cost frontier score higher than any run that's cheaper. The costs are the leaderboard's own estimates, so compare them only within this benchmark.
Source: Official FrontierPhysics leaderboard
| Model | Effort | Harness | Score | Cost per task | Output tokens |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Opus 5.5 | Claude Code | 27.4% | $27 | 381,551 | |
| GPT-6 Astra | max | Codex | 23.2% | $27 | 180,064 |
| GPT-6 Astra | xhigh | Codex | 19.6% | $19 | 110,732 |
| GPT-6.1 Sol | Codex | 19.6% | $5.33 | 206,427 | |
| GPT-6 Sol | Codex | 14.3% | $6.38 | 111,605 | |
| GPT-6.1 Terra | Codex | 14.3% | $3.46 | 123,213 | |
| Claude Fable 5.1 | Claude Code | 11.3% | $33 | 266,418 | |
| Claude Opus 5 | Claude Code | 9.50% | $57 | 304,799 | |
| | Antigravity | 8.30% | $8.87 | 311,443 | |
| GPT-5.6 Sol | max | Codex | 7.10% | $10 | 94,758 |
| Kimi K3.1 Pro | Claude Code | 6.50% | $9.60 | 165,685 | |
| GPT-5.6 Sol | xhigh | Codex | 4.20% | $2.79 | 37,449 |
| GLM-5.3 | Claude Code | 4.20% | $13 | 578,379 | |
| Grok 4.7 | Grok Build | 4.20% | $12 | 171,761 | |
| Claude Haiku 5.5 | Claude Code | 4.20% | $6.66 | 561,769 | |
| GPT-5.6 Luna | max | Codex | 3.60% | $0.68 | 107,831 |
| GPT-5.6 Terra | max | Codex | 3.60% | $5.80 | 100,090 |
| | Claude Code | 3.60% | $0.67 | 268,850 | |
| Kimi K3 | Claude Code | 2.40% | $9.33 | 209,062 | |
| Grok 4.6 | Grok Build | 2.40% | $9.36 | 78,679 | |
| GPT-5.6 Luna | xhigh | Codex | 1.80% | $0.41 | 74,489 |
| GPT-5.6 Terra | xhigh | Codex | 1.20% | $2.22 | 60,025 |
| MiMo-V2.6 Pro | Claude Code | 1.20% | $0.66 | 283,496 | |
| | Claude Code | 0.60% | $7.82 | 234,162 | |
| | Antigravity | 0% | $3.69 | 197,339 | |
| | Claude Code | 0% | $11 | 880,353 |
4 models have held number one on the official leaderboard since its release in August 2026
Lab claims count from the day the card came out, independent runs from the model’s release.
Source: Official FrontierPhysics 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 FrontierPhysics 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%