Benchmark Almanac

LBPP (Less Basic Python Problems)

Only in system cards

Models write Python solutions to 161 new problems built to avoid training-set contamination. Hidden tests score pass@1.

The Command A report adds parallel C++, Java, JavaScript, Go and Rust versions.

Made by
Cohere
Released
July 2024
Kind
Function-level problems
Level
University
Scored
Checked automatically
Answers
Code
Tasks
All public
Last in a system card
July 2026
Last model added
July 2026

In the authors’ words

In this paper, we consider contamination by code generation test sets, in particular in their use in modern large language models. We discuss three possible sources of such contamination and show findings supporting each of them: (i) direct data leakage, (ii) indirect data leakage through the use of synthetic data and (iii) overfitting to evaluation sets during model selection. To address this, we release Less Basic Python Problems (LBPP): an uncontaminated new benchmark of 161 prompts with their associated Python solutions. LBPP is released at https://huggingface.co/datasets/CohereForAI/lbpp .

Abstract of On Leakage of Code Generation Evaluation Datasets (arXiv:2407.07565, CC0)
2
Models scored in lab cards
2
System cards report it, from 2 labs

DiffusionGemma 26B A4B leads with 81%

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 DiffusionGemma 26B A4B 81%
  2. 2 Cohere Command A 51.5%

Source: Labs’ model cards

#ModelScoreSettingDateSource
1 DiffusionGemma 26B A4B 81% Jul 2026 Lab model card
2 Cohere Command A 51.5% Apr 2025 Lab model card

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% 2025 2026 Near the ceiling (85%) DiffusionGemma 26B A4B Cohere Command A 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2025 2026 Near the ceiling (85%) DiffusionGemma 26B A4B Cohere Command A

Source: Labs’ model cards

Labs report it only in system cards

We read the headline results of 522 launch posts from 52 labs, and none of them list this benchmark. Some system cards do, below.

2 system cards report it, from 2 labs

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
Jul 31, 2026 DiffusionGemma 26B A4B technical report 81 LBPP (v2), TD, 68.9 no-think (Table 3) Capabilities
Apr 1, 2025 Cohere Command A technical report 51.5 LBPP (All), six languages (Table 12, Table 26). Python 58.4, Command A Agentic 65.4 Capabilities

More in Coding

All 282 in Coding
  • SWE-bench Verified In use 500 human-validated GitHub issues from 12 Python repos. Agent writes a patch that must pass hidden tests. Claude Opus 4.7 83.5%
  • LiveCodeBench v6 In use Competitive programming problems collected after model cutoffs from LeetCode, AtCoder, Codeforces. Scored pass@1 on hidden tests. DeepSeek-V4-Pro 93.5%
  • SWE-bench Multilingual In use 300 GitHub-issue tasks across nine programming languages in SWE-bench format. Patch graded by repository tests. Claude Fable 5.2 96.6%
  • DeepSWE In use 113 original long-horizon engineering tasks across 91 repos and five languages, written from scratch. Hand-written verifiers accept alternative solutions. GPT-6 Astra 74.1%
  • SciCode In use Scientist-curated research coding problems split into subproblems across natural sciences. Code checked against test cases. Seed2.1 Pro 59.8%
  • Codeforces rating In use Model solves recent Codeforces contest problems. An Elo-style rating is computed from simulated contest performance. DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 3,471