MARS-Bench
Models handle long multi-turn dialogues built from play-by-play sports commentary. Tasks test ultra multi-turn, interactive multi-turn and cross-turn reasoning.
Accepted to EMNLP 2025 Findings. The scoring field is a guess from the abstract.
- Made by
- ByteDance Seed and collaborators (Yang et al.)
- Released
- May 2025
- Kind
- Multi-turn conversation
- Level
- Everyday
- Scored
- Checked automatically
- Answers
- Short answer
- Strongest model tested
- o4-mini #94 on the capability index
- Last in a launch post
- February 2026, dropped after it saturated
- Last model added
- March 2026
- Scores refreshed
- November 12th, 2026
In the authors’ words
Large Language Models (LLMs), e.g. ChatGPT, have been widely adopted in real-world dialogue applications. However, LLMs' robustness, especially in handling long complex dialogue sessions, including frequent motivation transfer, sophisticated cross-turn dependency, is criticized all along. Nevertheless, no existing benchmarks can fully reflect these weaknesses. We present MARS-Bench, a Multi-turn Athletic Real-world Scenario Dialogue Benchmark, designed to remedy the gap. MARS-Bench is constructed from play-by-play text commentary so to feature realistic dialogues specifically designed to evaluate three critical aspects of multi-turn conversations: Ultra Multi-turn, Interactive Multi-turn, and Cross-turn Tasks. Extensive experiments on MARS-Bench also reveal that closed-source LLMs significantly outperform open-source alternatives, explicit reasoning significantly boosts LLMs' robustness on handling long complex dialogue sessions, and LLMs indeed face significant challenges when handling motivation transfer and sophisticated cross-turn dependency. Moreover, we provide mechanistic interpretability on how attention sinks due to special tokens lead to LLMs' performance degradation when handling long complex dialogue sessions based on attention visualization experiment in Qwen2.5-7B-Instruction.
Gemini-2.5-Pro (snapshot unspecified) tops the leaderboard with 72.4%
Best score per entry from the benchmark's own leaderboard, read on November 12th, 2026. Where a model ran with several settings or harnesses, we keep its best. Names in gray aren't in our model list: fine-tunes, agent systems, products and older models. They don't count toward leaders. The best model we track is Claude 3.7 Sonnet, at 62.3%.
Seed2.0 Pro leads with 85.6%, claims included
Best score per model from every source, including labs’ own numbers and claims Epoch AI collected from reports and papers. Labs pick their own settings, so a claim can beat an independent run of the same model.
The newest model with a score here came out in April 2025, and nobody has tested a newer one. Among the 20 highest-ranked models on the capability index, these have no score yet:
- Claude Fable 5.2
-
Gemini 4 Carbon
- GPT-6 Astra
- Claude Opus 5.5
- and 16 more
- 72.4 Gemini-2.5-Pro (snapshot unspecified)
- 62.3 Claude 3.7 Sonnet
- 59.6 o1
- 59.2 Gemini-2.5-Flash (snapshot unspecified)
- 53.3 GPT-4.5
- 52.6
Doubao-1.5-pro
- 51.2 Grok 3
- 47.1 o4-mini
- 45.4 DeepSeek-R1 (snapshot unspecified)
- 43.2 Claude 3.5 Sonnet
- 42.1 o3-mini
- 38.9 Doubao-1.5-Pro-32k
- 37.3
DeepSeek-V3
- 35.8 GPT-4o
- 35.6
Gemini 2.0 Flash
- 34.9 Qwen3-235B
- 33.2
DeepSeek-V3
- 31.2 GPT-4.1 mini
- 30.4
Qwen2.5-Max
- 29.2
Qwen2.5-72B
- 25.8 GLM-Z1-Air
- 1 Gemini-2.5-Pro (snapshot unspecified) thinking 72.4%
- 2 Claude 3.7 Sonnet thinking 62.3%
- 3 o1 thinking 59.6%
- 4 Gemini-2.5-Flash (snapshot unspecified) thinking 59.2%
- 5 GPT-4.5 53.3%
- 6
Doubao-1.5-pro thinking 52.6%
- 7 Grok 3 thinking 51.2%
- 8 o4-mini thinking 47.1%
- 9 DeepSeek-R1 (snapshot unspecified) thinking 45.4%
- 10 Claude 3.5 Sonnet 43.2%
- 11 o3-mini thinking 42.1%
- 12 Doubao-1.5-Pro-32k 38.9%
- 13
DeepSeek-V3 Mar 2025, thinking 37.3%
- 14 GPT-4o Nov 2024 35.8%
- 15
Gemini 2.0 Flash Feb 2025 35.6%
- 16 Qwen3-235B thinking 34.9%
- 17
DeepSeek-V3 thinking 33.2%
- 18 GPT-4.1 mini 31.2%
- 19
Qwen2.5-Max 30.4%
- 20
Qwen2.5-72B 29.2%
- 21 GLM-Z1-Air thinking 25.8%
Source: Official MARS-Bench leaderboard
- 1
Seed2.0 Pro 85.6%
- 2
Seed1.8 70.1%
- 3 Claude 3.7 Sonnet thinking 62.3%
- 4 o1 thinking 59.6%
- 5 GPT-4.5 53.3%
- 6
Doubao-1.5-pro thinking 52.6%
- 7 Grok 3 thinking 51.2%
- 8 o4-mini thinking 47.1%
- 9 Claude 3.5 Sonnet 43.2%
- 10 o3-mini thinking 42.1%
- 11
DeepSeek-V3 Mar 2025, thinking 37.3%
- 12 GPT-4o Nov 2024 35.8%
- 13
Gemini 2.0 Flash Feb 2025 35.6%
- 14
DeepSeek-V3 thinking 33.2%
- 15 GPT-4.1 mini 31.2%
- 16
Qwen2.5-Max 30.4%
- 17
Qwen2.5-72B 29.2%
Sources: Labs’ model cards and official MARS-Bench leaderboard
| # | Entry | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Gemini-2.5-Pro (snapshot unspecified) | 72.4% | thinking | Official leaderboard | |
| 2 | Claude 3.7 Sonnet | 62.3% | thinking | Feb 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 3 | o1 | 59.6% | thinking | Dec 2024 | Official leaderboard |
| 4 | Gemini-2.5-Flash (snapshot unspecified) | 59.2% | thinking | Official leaderboard | |
| 5 | GPT-4.5 | 53.3% | Feb 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 6 | | 52.6% | thinking | Jan 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 7 | Grok 3 | 51.2% | thinking | Apr 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 8 | o4-mini | 47.1% | thinking | Apr 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 9 | DeepSeek-R1 (snapshot unspecified) | 45.4% | thinking | Official leaderboard | |
| 10 | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | 43.2% | Jun 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 11 | o3-mini | 42.1% | thinking | Jan 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 12 | Doubao-1.5-Pro-32k | 38.9% | Official leaderboard | ||
| 13 | | 37.3% | thinking | Mar 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 14 | GPT-4o Nov 2024 | 35.8% | Nov 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 15 | | 35.6% | Feb 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 16 | Qwen3-235B | 34.9% | thinking | Official leaderboard | |
| 17 | | 33.2% | thinking | Dec 2024 | Official leaderboard |
| 18 | GPT-4.1 mini | 31.2% | Apr 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 19 | | 30.4% | Jan 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 20 | | 29.2% | Sep 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 21 | GLM-Z1-Air | 25.8% | thinking | Official leaderboard |
| # | Model | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | | 85.6% | Feb 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 2 | | 70.1% | Dec 2025 | Lab model card | |
| 3 | Claude 3.7 Sonnet | 62.3% | thinking | Feb 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 4 | o1 | 59.6% | thinking | Dec 2024 | Official leaderboard |
| 5 | GPT-4.5 | 53.3% | Feb 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 6 | | 52.6% | thinking | Jan 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 7 | Grok 3 | 51.2% | thinking | Apr 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 8 | o4-mini | 47.1% | thinking | Apr 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 9 | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | 43.2% | Jun 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 10 | o3-mini | 42.1% | thinking | Jan 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 11 | | 37.3% | thinking | Mar 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 12 | GPT-4o Nov 2024 | 35.8% | Nov 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 13 | | 35.6% | Feb 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 14 | | 33.2% | thinking | Dec 2024 | Official leaderboard |
| 15 | GPT-4.1 mini | 31.2% | Apr 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 16 | | 30.4% | Jan 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 17 | | 29.2% | Sep 2024 | Official leaderboard |
Labs report scores for 2 models in their cards. Switch the scores above to rank them together.
Number one over time 3 models have held number one with claims included since its release in May 2025
Lab claims count from the day the card came out, independent runs from the model’s release. We draw one row each for the benchmark’s own leaderboard and what labs claim in their cards.
Sources: Official MARS-Bench leaderboard and labs’ model cards
ByteDance Seed’s own number for Seed2.0 Pro passed 85% in February 2026
All the scores we have, one dot each, so a model tested at several settings appears more than once.
Sources: Official MARS-Bench leaderboard and labs’ model cards
Labs headline it less often now, last in February 2026
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.
| Date | Launch post | Score | As the post writes it |
|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 14, 2026 | 85.6 | MARS-Bench | |
| Dec 18, 2025 | 70.1 | MARS-Bench |
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.
| Date | Document | Score | As the document writes it | Section |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 21, 2026 | | 70.1 | MARS-Bench (Table 1) | Capabilities |
| Feb 14, 2026 | | 85.6 | MARS-Bench (Table 3) | Capabilities |
More in Instructions and chat
- IFEval In use Models answer about 500 prompts containing verifiable instructions such as word limits or required keywords. Code checks each instruction for strict and loose accuracy.
Gemma 4 31B IT 98.9%
- IFBench In use 58 new out-of-domain verifiable output constraints. Scored by programmatic constraint checks (strict or loose).
Nemotron-Cascade 2 30B-A3B 82.9%
- MultiChallenge In use Multi-turn conversations testing instruction retention, inference memory, versioned editing and self-coherence. Graded by LLM judge with rubrics. GPT-6.1 Sol 82%
- Multi-IF In use Models follow verifiable instructions over three-turn conversations in eight languages, extending IFEval. Scored by instruction accuracy at each turn. LFM3-1.7B 89.1%
- AdvancedIF In use Models respond to over 1,600 prompts with complex, multi-turn, and system-level instructions. A judge model checks each response against expert-written rubrics.
MAI-Thinking-1 85%
- IFStruct In use Models generate JSON or YAML that must follow a requested schema and phrasing constraints, without constrained decoding. A response passes only if every structural constraint holds.
Gemma 4 31B IT 95.9%