Seal-0
Models answer 111 fact-seeking questions where web search returns conflicting or unhelpful results. Answers are graded for accuracy, usually with search enabled.
The makers refresh the answers about monthly (about 20 dated updates from 2025-07 to 2026-09) and keep old versions on Google Drive. Scores need the version date to compare.
- Made by
- Virginia Tech
- Released
- June 2025
- Kind
- Questions that need search
- Level
- University
- Scored
- Checked automatically
- Answers
- Short answer
- Tasks
- All public
- Strongest model tested
- Kimi K2.5 #75 on the capability index
- Last in a launch post
- February 2026, dropped before it saturated
- Last model added
- February 2026
- Scores refreshed
- November 12th, 2026
In the authors’ words
We introduce SealQA, a new challenge benchmark for evaluating SEarch-Augmented Language models on fact-seeking questions where web search yields conflicting, noisy, or unhelpful results. SealQA comes in three flavors: (1) Seal-0 (main) and (2) Seal-Hard, which assess factual accuracy and reasoning capabilities, with Seal-0 focusing on the most challenging questions where chat models (e.g., GPT-4.1) typically achieve near-zero accuracy; and (3) LongSeal, which extends SealQA to test long-context, multi-document reasoning in "needle-in-a-haystack" settings. Our evaluation reveals critical limitations in current models: Even frontier LLMs perform poorly across all SealQA flavors. On Seal-0, frontier agentic models equipped with tools like o3 and o4-mini achieve only 17.1% and 6.3% accuracy, respectively, at their best reasoning efforts. We find that advanced reasoning models such as DeepSeek-R1-671B and o3-mini are highly vulnerable to noisy search results. Notably, increasing test-time compute does not yield reliable gains across o3-mini, o4-mini, and o3, with performance often plateauing or even declining early. Additionally, while recent models are less affected by the "lost-in-the-middle" issue, they still fail to reliably identify relevant documents in LongSeal when faced with numerous distractors. To facilitate future work, we release SealQA at huggingface.co/datasets/vtllms/sealqa.
Kimi K2.5 leads with 57.4% among models released by February 2026
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.
o3 leads with 17.1% across all independent runs
Best score per model across the official leaderboard, Epoch AI’s own runs and any board Epoch AI copied. Each bar and row names its source.
Kimi K2.5 leads with 57.4%, 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 February 2026, and nobody has reported 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
- 1 Kimi K2.5 57.4%
- 2 Kimi K2 Thinking 56.3%
- 3
Seed2.0 Pro 49.5%
- 4
Qwen3.5-27B 47.2%
- 5
Qwen3.5 397B-A17B 46.9%
- 6
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B 44.1%
- 7
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B 41.4%
Source: Labs’ model cards
- 1 o3 w/ Search 17.1%
- 2 o4-mini w/ Search 5.40%
- 3
DeepSeek-R1 May 2025, w/o Search 5.40%
- 4
DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-14B w/ Search 3.60%
- 5
DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-1.5B w/ Search 2.70%
- 6 o3-mini w/o Search 2.70%
- 7
Llama 3.1-70B w/o Search 0%
- 8
Llama 3.2 3B w/o Search 0%
- 9
Llama 4 Scout w/o Search 0%
- 10 GPT-4.1 w/o Search 0%
- 11 GPT-4.1 mini w/o Search 0%
Source: Official Seal-0 leaderboard
- 57.4 Kimi K2.5
- 56.3 Kimi K2 Thinking
- 49.5
Seed2.0 Pro
- 47.2
Qwen3.5-27B
- 46.9
Qwen3.5 397B-A17B
- 44.1
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- 41.4
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B
- 17.1 o3
- 5.40 o4-mini
- 5.40
DeepSeek-R1
- 3.60
DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-14B
- 2.70
DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-1.5B
- 2.70 o3-mini
- 0.0
Llama 3.1-70B
- 0.0
Llama 3.2 3B
- 0.0
Llama 4 Scout
- 0.0 GPT-4.1
- 0.0 GPT-4.1 mini
- 1 Kimi K2.5 57.4%
- 2 Kimi K2 Thinking 56.3%
- 3
Seed2.0 Pro 49.5%
- 4
Qwen3.5-27B 47.2%
- 5
Qwen3.5 397B-A17B 46.9%
- 6
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B 44.1%
- 7
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B 41.4%
- 8 o3 w/ Search 17.1%
- 9 o4-mini w/ Search 5.40%
- 10
DeepSeek-R1 May 2025, w/o Search 5.40%
- 11
DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-14B w/ Search 3.60%
- 12
DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-1.5B w/ Search 2.70%
- 13 o3-mini w/o Search 2.70%
- 14
Llama 3.1-70B w/o Search 0%
- 15
Llama 3.2 3B w/o Search 0%
- 16
Llama 4 Scout w/o Search 0%
- 17 GPT-4.1 w/o Search 0%
- 18 GPT-4.1 mini w/o Search 0%
Sources: Labs’ model cards and official Seal-0 leaderboard
| # | Model | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Kimi K2.5 | 57.4% | Jan 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 2 | Kimi K2 Thinking | 56.3% | Nov 2025 | Lab model card | |
| 3 | | 49.5% | Feb 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 4 | | 47.2% | Feb 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 5 | | 46.9% | Feb 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 6 | | 44.1% | Feb 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 7 | | 41.4% | Feb 2026 | Lab model card |
| # | Model | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | o3 | 17.1% | w/ Search | Apr 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 2 | o4-mini | 5.40% | w/ Search | Apr 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 3 | | 5.40% | w/o Search | May 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 4 | | 3.60% | w/ Search | Jan 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 5 | | 2.70% | w/ Search | Jan 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 6 | o3-mini | 2.70% | w/o Search | Jan 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 7 | | 0% | w/o Search | Jul 2024 | Official leaderboard |
| 8 | | 0% | w/o Search | Sep 2024 | Official leaderboard |
| 9 | | 0% | w/o Search | Apr 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 10 | GPT-4.1 | 0% | w/o Search | Apr 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 11 | GPT-4.1 mini | 0% | w/o Search | Apr 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| # | Model | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Kimi K2.5 | 57.4% | Jan 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 2 | Kimi K2 Thinking | 56.3% | Nov 2025 | Lab model card | |
| 3 | | 49.5% | Feb 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 4 | | 47.2% | Feb 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 5 | | 46.9% | Feb 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 6 | | 44.1% | Feb 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 7 | | 41.4% | Feb 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 8 | o3 | 17.1% | w/ Search | Apr 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 9 | o4-mini | 5.40% | w/ Search | Apr 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 10 | | 5.40% | w/o Search | May 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 11 | | 3.60% | w/ Search | Jan 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 12 | | 2.70% | w/ Search | Jan 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 13 | o3-mini | 2.70% | w/o Search | Jan 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 14 | | 0% | w/o Search | Jul 2024 | Official leaderboard |
| 15 | | 0% | w/o Search | Sep 2024 | Official leaderboard |
| 16 | | 0% | w/o Search | Apr 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 17 | GPT-4.1 | 0% | w/o Search | Apr 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 18 | GPT-4.1 mini | 0% | w/o Search | Apr 2025 | Official leaderboard |
The benchmark's own leaderboard has 15 entries, 11 of them models we track. Switch the scores above to rank them together.
Scores at each effort level
Models the leaderboard ran at two or more effort levels. We don’t have enough cost data here to say what the extra effort costs.
Source: Official Seal-0 leaderboard
| Model | Effort | Harness | Score | Cost per task | Output tokens |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| o3 | w/ Search | 17.1% | |||
| o4-mini | w/ Search | 5.40% | |||
| | w/o Search | 5.40% | |||
| | w/ Search | 4.50% | |||
| | w/ Search | 3.60% | |||
| | w/ Search | 2.70% | |||
| o3-mini | w/o Search | 2.70% | |||
| o3-mini | w/ Search | 2.70% | |||
| | w/o Search | 0.90% | |||
| | w/o Search | 0% | |||
| | w/ Search | 0% | |||
| | w/o Search | 0% | |||
| | w/ Search | 0% | |||
| | w/o Search | 0% | |||
| | w/o Search | 0% | |||
| | w/ Search | 0% | |||
| GPT-4.1 | w/o Search | 0% | |||
| GPT-4.1 | w/ Search | 0% | |||
| GPT-4.1 mini | w/o Search | 0% | |||
| GPT-4.1 mini | w/ Search | 0% |
2 models have held number one in labs’ own numbers since its release in June 2025 Number one over time 3 models have held number one with claims included since its release in June 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.
Scores over time
All the scores we have, one dot each, so a model tested at several settings appears more than once.
Sources: Official Seal-0 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 24, 2026 | 41.4 | Seal-0 | |
| Feb 24, 2026 | 47.2 | Seal-0 | |
| Feb 24, 2026 | 44.1 | Seal-0 | |
| Feb 16, 2026 | 46.9 | Seal-0 | |
| Feb 14, 2026 | 49.5 | Seal-0 | |
| Jan 27, 2026 | Kimi K2.5 | 57.4 | Seal-0 |
| Nov 6, 2025 | Kimi K2 Thinking | 56.3 | Seal-0, w/ tools |
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.
| Date | Document | Score | As the document writes it | Section |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 14, 2026 | | 49.5 | Seal-0 (Table 11) | Capabilities |
| Jan 30, 2026 | Kimi K2.5 technical report | 57.4 | Seal-0, Avg@4 (Table 4) | Capabilities |
More in Knowledge
- MMLU-Pro In use Harder 10-option version of MMLU with reasoning-focused questions across 14 subjects.
Intern-S2-397B 89.8%
- SuperGPQA In use 26,529 graduate-level multiple-choice questions across 285 disciplines. Accuracy.
Qwen 3.6 Max (Preview) 73.9%
- WideSearch In use 200 bilingual broad info-seeking tasks: agent collects many atomic facts into a table. Scored by success rate and row/item F1.
Tencent Hy4 preview 83.9%
- BBEH micro average In use Models solve harder replacements for each of the 23 BIG-Bench Hard tasks, 4,520 examples in total. The score is the share of all examples answered correctly.
Gemma 4 31B IT 74.4%
- KMMLU-Pro In use Models answer multiple-choice questions taken from Korean National Professional Licensure exams. It tests professional knowledge used in Korean industry.
Solar Pro 4 79.2%
- HLE-Verified In use Verified and revised version of Humanity's Last Exam (1,811 items) with uncertain items removed.
Seed2.0 Pro 73.6%