Benchmark Almanac

HealthBench Hard Hallucinations

GPT-5 1.60% leads since August 2025
Dropped

Models respond to difficult health conversations that 2 or more physicians validated. The score is the hallucination rate, so lower is better.

OpenAI defined this subset of HealthBench Hard and HealthBench Consensus in the GPT-5 system card.

Made by
OpenAI
Released
August 2025
Kind
Hallucination rates
Scored
Graded by a model
Answers
Open-ended
Strongest model tested
GPT-5 #70 on the capability index
Last in a launch post
August 2025, dropped before it saturated
Last model added
August 2025

In the authors’ words

We present HealthBench, an open-source benchmark measuring the performance and safety of large language models in healthcare. HealthBench consists of 5,000 multi-turn conversations between a model and an individual user or healthcare professional. Responses are evaluated using conversation-specific rubrics created by 262 physicians. Unlike previous multiple-choice or short-answer benchmarks, HealthBench enables realistic, open-ended evaluation through 48,562 unique rubric criteria spanning several health contexts (e.g., emergencies, transforming clinical data, global health) and behavioral dimensions (e.g., accuracy, instruction following, communication). HealthBench performance over the last two years reflects steady initial progress (compare GPT-3.5 Turbo's 16% to GPT-4o's 32%) and more rapid recent improvements (o3 scores 60%). Smaller models have especially improved: GPT-4.1 nano outperforms GPT-4o and is 25 times cheaper. We additionally release two HealthBench variations: HealthBench Consensus, which includes 34 particularly important dimensions of model behavior validated via physician consensus, and HealthBench Hard, where the current top score is 32%. We hope that HealthBench grounds progress towards model development and applications that benefit human health.

Abstract of HealthBench: Evaluating Large Language Models Towards Improved Human Health (arXiv:2505.08775, CC0)
2
Models scored in lab cards
1
Launch post lists it, from 1 lab
2
System cards report it, from 1 lab

GPT-5 leads with 1.60%

Best score per model as labs report them in their own cards. Labs pick their own settings, so these compare less cleanly than independent runs.

  1. 1 GPT-5 1.60%
  2. 2 GPT-5 mini 3.80%

Source: Labs’ model cards

#ModelScoreSettingDateSource
1 GPT-5 1.60% Aug 2025 Lab model card
2 GPT-5 mini 3.80% Aug 2025 Lab model card

Number one over time

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

OpenAI
Lab claims Not tested since Aug 2025
GPT-5 1.60%

Source: Labs’ model cards

Scores over time

All the scores we have, one dot each, so a model tested at several settings appears more than once.

Reported by the lab in its model card Best so far
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% GPT-5 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% GPT-5

Source: Labs’ model cards

No launch post has listed it since August 2025

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.

OpenAI
DateLaunch postScoreAs the post writes it
Aug 7, 2025 GPT-5 1.6 HealthBench Hard Hallucinations (lower is better)

2 system cards report it, from 1 lab

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.

DateDocumentScoreAs the document writes itSection
Aug 7, 2025 GPT-5 system card 1.6 HealthBench Hard Hallucinations, error rate, printed chart label (Figure 7) Health
Aug 7, 2025 GPT-5 mini system card 3.8 HealthBench Hard Hallucinations, gpt-5-thinking-mini, printed chart label (Figure 7) Health

More in Factuality

All 74 in Factuality
  • SimpleVQA In use Models answer 2,025 short factual questions about images across 9 tasks and 9 topics. An LLM judge grades answers against fixed references. Qwen3.7-Plus 81.7%
  • HallusionBench In use Models answer 1,129 yes or no questions about 346 images, built in pairs to expose language hallucination and visual illusion. Scored by accuracy. Keye-VL-2.0-30B-A3B 73.5%
  • SimpleQA Verified In use 1,000 human-verified, de-duplicated short-answer factual questions measuring parametric knowledge. Gemini 3.1 Pro 77.5%
  • Kimi Hallu Bench In use Models answer hard prompts drawn from practical work tasks. Fact-checking agents score the share of claims that are hallucinated. GPT-6 Astra 4.20%
  • Internal adversarially-designed factuality evaluations In use Models answer adversarial questions in nine categories such as history, math and code. Scored on agreement with human ideal responses. GPT-6 Luna 7.60%
  • AA-Omniscience v1.1 In use Models answer 3,000 knowledge questions in six domains without tools and may abstain. The index adds correct answers and subtracts wrong ones. Inkling 2 Small 16.1