$OneMillion-Bench
Agent solves 400 expert-curated tasks in law, finance, industry, healthcare and science. Rubric grading of accuracy, logic, feasibility and compliance.
NeurIPS 2026. Qwen reports an expert score judged by gemini-3.1-pro-preview.
- Released
- March 2026
- Kind
- Tasks from real jobs
- Level
- Expert
- Scored
- Graded by a model
- Answers
- Open-ended
- Tasks
- All public
- Strongest model tested
- Claude Fable 5.1 #7 on the capability index
- Last in a launch post
- August 2026
- Last model added
- September 2026
- Scores refreshed
- November 12th, 2026
In the authors’ words
As language models (LMs) evolve from chat assistants to long-horizon agents capable of multi-step reasoning and tool use, existing benchmarks remain largely confined to structured or exam-style tasks that fall short of real-world professional demands. To this end, we introduce $OneMillion-Bench ($OMB), a benchmark of 400 expert-curated tasks spanning Law, Finance, Industry, Healthcare, and Natural Science, built to evaluate agents across economically consequential scenarios. Unlike prior work, the benchmark requires retrieving authoritative sources, resolving conflicting evidence, applying domain-specific rules, and making constraint decisions, where correctness depends as much on the reasoning process as the final answer. We adopt a rubric-based evaluation protocol scoring factual accuracy, logical coherence, practical feasibility, and professional compliance, focusing on expert-level problems to ensure meaningful differentiation across agents. Together, $OMB provides a unified testbed for assessing agentic reliability, professional depth, and an indicator of practical readiness in domain-intensive scenarios.
Claude Fable 5.1 leads with 42.1% 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.
Seed2.1 Pro leads with 68.8%, 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 September 2026, 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 15 more
- 1 Claude Fable 5.1 42.1%
- 2
Tencent Hy4 preview 35.3%
- 3 Kimi K3 35%
- 4 GPT-5.6 Sol Pro 32.2%
- 5
Qwen 3.8 Max 31.9%
- 6 GLM-5.3 31%
- 7
DeepSeek-V4-Pro 26%
- 8
Seed2.1 Pro 23.7%
- 9
Gemini 3.7 Flash 22.5%
- 10
Inkling 22.1%
- 11
Gemini 3.5 Flash 17%
- 12 Grok 4.5 15.8%
- 13
Tencent Hy3 13%
Source: Official $OneMillion-Bench leaderboard
- 1
Seed2.1 Pro 68.8%
- 2
Tencent Hy4 preview 65.4%
- 3 Claude Fable 5.1 42.1%
- 4 Kimi K3 35%
- 5 GPT-5.6 Sol Pro 32.2%
- 6
Qwen 3.8 Max 31.9%
- 7 GLM-5.3 31%
- 8
DeepSeek-V4-Pro 26%
- 9
Gemini 3.7 Flash 22.5%
- 10
Inkling 22.1%
- 11
Gemini 3.5 Flash 17%
- 12 Grok 4.5 15.8%
- 13
Tencent Hy3 13%
Sources: Labs’ model cards and official $OneMillion-Bench leaderboard
| # | Model | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Claude Fable 5.1 | 42.1% | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 2 | | 35.3% | Aug 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 3 | Kimi K3 | 35% | Jul 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 4 | GPT-5.6 Sol Pro | 32.2% | Jul 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 5 | | 31.9% | Aug 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 6 | GLM-5.3 | 31% | Aug 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 7 | | 26% | Apr 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 8 | | 23.7% | Jun 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 9 | | 22.5% | Aug 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 10 | | 22.1% | Jul 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 11 | | 17% | May 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 12 | Grok 4.5 | 15.8% | Jul 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 13 | | 13% | Jul 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| # | Model | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | | 68.8% | Jun 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 2 | | 65.4% | Aug 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 3 | Claude Fable 5.1 | 42.1% | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 4 | Kimi K3 | 35% | Jul 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 5 | GPT-5.6 Sol Pro | 32.2% | Jul 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 6 | | 31.9% | Aug 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 7 | GLM-5.3 | 31% | Aug 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 8 | | 26% | Apr 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 9 | | 22.5% | Aug 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 10 | | 22.1% | Jul 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 11 | | 17% | May 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 12 | Grok 4.5 | 15.8% | Jul 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 13 | | 13% | Jul 2026 | Official leaderboard |
Labs report scores for 2 models in their cards. Switch the scores above to rank them together.
5 models have held number one on the official leaderboard since its release in March 2026 2 models have held number one with claims included since its release in March 2026
Lab claims count from the day the card came out, independent runs from the model’s release.
Source: Official $OneMillion-Bench leaderboard
Scores over time
All the scores we have, one dot each, so a model tested at several settings appears more than once.
Sources: Official $OneMillion-Bench leaderboard and labs’ model cards
2 labs put it in a launch post in the last six months
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 28, 2026 | 65.4 | OneMillionBench (with tools) | |
| Aug 3, 2026 | $OneMillion-Bench (expert score) |
One system card reports it
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 23, 2026 | | 68.8 | OneMillion Bench (Table 1) | Capabilities |
The lab's number comes out ahead in 2 of 2 pairs that differ
Each score a lab reported for its own model, beside the same model's best score on the leaderboard. Gaps mostly come from different harnesses, effort levels and task subsets. Every benchmark.
| Model | Lab says | Board says | Gap |
|---|---|---|---|
| | 68.8% OneMillion Bench (Table 1) | 23.7% Leaderboard | +45 pts |
| | 65.4% OneMillionBench (with tools) | 35.3% Leaderboard | +30 pts |
More in Economic work
- JobBench In use 130 tasks from 35 occupations workers most want delegated. Agent works through messy reference files, graded by fact-anchored binary rubrics. GLM-5.3 61.4%
- GDPval In use Real work tasks from 44 occupations with reference files. Experts blindly compare model deliverables with expert work. Metric is win-or-tie rate.
Seed2.1 Pro 87.9%
- GDPval-AA v2.1 In use Agents with shell and web access complete 220 GDPval gold tasks from 44 occupations. Blind pairwise comparisons give Elo ratings. Claude Opus 5.5 1,846
- AA-Briefcase v1.1 In use Version 1.1 of Artificial Analysis's multi-hour office work evaluation, with Elo ratings fitted by Crowd-BT. Claude Opus 5.5 1,822
- CoWorkBench In use Agent completes long-horizon productivity tasks across computer science, finance, law and medicine. Qwen in-house scoring (method unpublished). Claude Fable 5 75.9%
- OfficeQA In use Grounded reasoning over a large corpus of U.S. Treasury Bulletin documents: locate tables and compute precise numeric answers. Claude Opus 4.7 86.3%