Benchmark Almanac

Into the Unknown

Claude Opus 4.8 0% leads since October 2026
Not in model cards

Agents get a science paper and an unpublished follow-up direction from a DOE national lab scientist, then write the follow-up paper. Rubrics built from the scientist's conditions grade it, plus an integrity check.

Nine agents wrote 15 follow-ups each. None of the 135 papers met all conditions, and 114 failed the integrity check. 152 HF paper upvotes.

Released
October 2026
Kind
Research science
Level
Research frontier
Scored
Graded by a model
Answers
Open-ended
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

Can AI agents carry out research on open scientific problems? We introduce Into the Unknown, a benchmark that provides an agent with a science paper along with a research direction to pursue and tasks it to write a follow-up paper. We work with scientists at US Department of Energy (DOE) national laboratories, who each contribute an unpublished follow-up direction from their own work together with the necessary conditions a submission must meet. While assessing the quality of a follow-up paper is challenging in general, using these conditions to form a rubric makes evaluation more tractable for research problems that have no reference answer. We have nine frontier agents write 15 follow-ups each, spanning quantum computing, plasma physics, computational chemistry, materials science, and scientific machine learning domains. None of the 135 submissions satisfies all the conditions, and 114 fail our integrity check, most often because the paper claims work that was never done or reports numbers that contradict the recorded evidence. Overall, agents readily produce papers that look like follow-ups, but none meets the standard of the domain scientist, leaving substantial headroom. Our code and data are publicly available.

Abstract of Into the Unknown: Benchmarking AI agents on open scientific research problems (arXiv:2610.19159, CC0)
9
Models scored on its own leaderboard

9 models share the top score of 0% 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:

  1. 1 Claude Opus 4.8 max 0%
  2. 2 Claude Fable 5 max 0%
  3. 3 GPT-5.6 Sol max 0%
  4. 4 Kimi K3 default 0%
  5. 5 Claude Opus 5 max 0%
  6. 6 DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 default 0%
  7. 7 GLM-5.3 default 0%
  8. 8 GPT-6 Astra max 0%
  9. 9 Claude Opus 5.5 max 0%

Source: Official Into the Unknown leaderboard

#ModelScoreSettingDateSource
1 Claude Opus 4.8 0% max, claude-agent-sdk May 2026 Official leaderboard
2 Claude Fable 5 0% max, claude-agent-sdk Jun 2026 Official leaderboard
3 GPT-5.6 Sol 0% max, codex-sdk Jul 2026 Official leaderboard
4 Kimi K3 0% default, kimi-agent-sdk Jul 2026 Official leaderboard
5 Claude Opus 5 0% max, claude-agent-sdk Jul 2026 Official leaderboard
6 DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 0% default, deepseek-harness Aug 2026 Official leaderboard
7 GLM-5.3 0% default, software-agent-sdk Aug 2026 Official leaderboard
8 GPT-6 Astra 0% max, codex-sdk Sep 2026 Official leaderboard
9 Claude Opus 5.5 0% max, claude-agent-sdk Sep 2026 Official leaderboard

Number one over time

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

Anthropic
Own leaderboard 1 leader

Source: Official Into the Unknown 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
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2026 Near the ceiling (85%) Claude Opus 4.8 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2026 Near the ceiling (85%) Claude Opus 4.8

Source: Official Into the Unknown 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

All 92 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%