Benchmark Almanac

WMDP Biology

Grok 4.20 91% leads since March 2026
Yi-34B 75.3% leads
Grok 4.20 91% leads since March 2026
Fading

Models answer 1,273 multiple-choice questions that proxy hazardous biosecurity knowledge. Biology split of WMDP.

Subset of the WMDP benchmark. 1,273 test questions in the Hugging Face config, MIT licensed. A cybersecurity split also exists.

Made by
CAIS + Scale AI et al.
Released
March 2024
Kind
Hazardous knowledge
Level
Expert
Scored
Checked automatically
Answers
Multiple choice
Tasks
All public
Strongest model tested
Gemini 3 Pro #55 on the capability index
Last in a launch post
March 2026, dropped after it saturated
Last model added
April 2026
Scores refreshed
November 12th, 2026

In the authors’ words

The White House Executive Order on Artificial Intelligence highlights the risks of large language models (LLMs) empowering malicious actors in developing biological, cyber, and chemical weapons. To measure these risks of malicious use, government institutions and major AI labs are developing evaluations for hazardous capabilities in LLMs. However, current evaluations are private, preventing further research into mitigating risk. Furthermore, they focus on only a few, highly specific pathways for malicious use. To fill these gaps, we publicly release the Weapons of Mass Destruction Proxy (WMDP) benchmark, a dataset of 3,668 multiple-choice questions that serve as a proxy measurement of hazardous knowledge in biosecurity, cybersecurity, and chemical security. WMDP was developed by a consortium of academics and technical consultants, and was stringently filtered to eliminate sensitive information prior to public release. WMDP serves two roles: first, as an evaluation for hazardous knowledge in LLMs, and second, as a benchmark for unlearning methods to remove such hazardous knowledge. To guide progress on unlearning, we develop RMU, a state-of-the-art unlearning method based on controlling model representations. RMU reduces model performance on WMDP while maintaining general capabilities in areas such as biology and computer science, suggesting that unlearning may be a concrete path towards reducing malicious use from LLMs. We release our benchmark and code publicly at https://wmdp.ai

Abstract of The WMDP Benchmark: Measuring and Reducing Malicious Use With Unlearning (arXiv:2403.03218, CC0)
8
Models scored in lab cards
1
Launch post lists it, from 1 lab
8
System cards report it, from 4 labs

Grok 4.20 leads with 91% 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.

Yi-34B leads with 75.3% 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.

Grok 4.20 leads with 91%, 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:

  1. 1 Grok 4.20 91%
  2. 2 OpenAI deep research 90%
  3. 3 Gemini 3 Pro 88.2%
  4. 4 Gemini 2.5 Pro Jun 2025 86%
  5. 5 GPT-4.5 85%
  6. 6 Gemini 2.5 Pro Mar 2025 84.3%
  7. 7 Gemini 2.5 Flash Jun 2025 84%
  8. 8 Code World Model (CWM) 78.1%

Source: Labs’ model cards

Source: Official WMDP Biology leaderboard

#ModelScoreSettingDateSource
1 Grok 4.20 91% Mar 2026 Lab model card
2 OpenAI deep research 90% Feb 2025 Lab model card
3 Gemini 3 Pro 88.2% Nov 2025 Lab model card
4 Gemini 2.5 Pro Jun 2025 86% Jul 2025 Lab model card
5 GPT-4.5 85% Feb 2025 Lab model card
6 Gemini 2.5 Pro Mar 2025 84.3% Apr 2025 Lab model card
7 Gemini 2.5 Flash Jun 2025 84% Jul 2025 Lab model card
8 Code World Model (CWM) 78.1% Oct 2025 Lab model card
#ModelScoreSettingDateSource
1 Yi-34B 75.3% Nov 2023 Official leaderboard
2 Mixtral 8x7B 74.8% Dec 2023 Official leaderboard
#ModelScoreSettingDateSource
1 Grok 4.20 91% Mar 2026 Lab model card
2 OpenAI deep research 90% Feb 2025 Lab model card
3 Gemini 3 Pro 88.2% Nov 2025 Lab model card
4 Gemini 2.5 Pro Jun 2025 86% Jul 2025 Lab model card
5 GPT-4.5 85% Feb 2025 Lab model card
6 Gemini 2.5 Pro Mar 2025 84.3% Apr 2025 Lab model card
7 Gemini 2.5 Flash Jun 2025 84% Jul 2025 Lab model card
8 Code World Model (CWM) 78.1% Oct 2025 Lab model card
9 Yi-34B 75.3% Nov 2023 Official leaderboard
10 Mixtral 8x7B 74.8% Dec 2023 Official leaderboard

The benchmark's own leaderboard has 10 entries, 2 of them models we track. Switch the scores above to rank them together.

2 models have held number one in labs’ own numbers since its release in March 2024 Number one over time 3 models have held number one with claims included since its release in March 2024

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

OpenAI xAI
Lab claims Passed 85% in Feb 2025, by OpenAI deep research
Grok 4.20 91%

Source: Labs’ model cards

OpenAI’s own number for OpenAI deep research passed 85% in February 2025

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 Reported by the lab in its model card Best so far
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2024 2025 2026 Near the ceiling (85%) Grok 4.20 OpenAI deep research Yi-34B 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2024 2025 2026 Near the ceiling (85%) Grok 4.20 Yi-34B

Sources: Official WMDP Biology leaderboard and labs’ model cards

Labs headline it less often now, last in March 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.

xAI
DateLaunch postScoreAs the post writes it
Mar 9, 2026 Grok 4.20 91 WMDP Bio, accuracy 0.91, Grok 4.2 SA, Table 4

8 system cards report it, from 4 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
Apr 7, 2026 Grok 4.20 model card 91 WMDP Bio, accuracy 0.91, Grok 4.2 SA, Table 4 Safety
Nov 18, 2025 Gemini 3 Pro system card 88.2 WMDP BIO (N=1273), mean solve rate, shuffled answer choices (Figure 1) Bio and chem risk
Oct 8, 2025 Code World Model (CWM) technical report 78.1 WMDP-Bio (Table 8) Bio and chem risk
Jul 7, 2025 Gemini 2.5 Pro technical report 86 WMDP BIO (N=1273), mean solve rate (Figure 9) Bio and chem risk
Jul 7, 2025 Gemini 2.5 Flash technical report 84 WMDP BIO (N=1273), mean solve rate (Figure 9) Bio and chem risk
Apr 28, 2025 Gemini 2.5 Pro model card 84.3 WMDP BIO (N=1273), mean solve rate over 100 shuffled runs (Figure 1) Bio and chem risk
Feb 27, 2025 GPT-4.5 system card 85 WMDP Biology, 1,520 questions, post-mitigation (4.3.6) Bio and chem risk
Feb 25, 2025 OpenAI deep research system card 90 WMDP Biology, 1,520 questions, cons@4, post-mitigation with browsing, text and printed chart label (without browsing 87%) (3.4.4) Bio and chem risk

More in Biology and chemistry

All 109 in Biology and chemistry
  • GeneBench Pro In use Agents analyze messy simulated genomics and biology datasets to estimate a decision-relevant quantity across 129 problems. Scored automatically against known answers. GPT-5.6 Sol 31.5%
  • SUPERChem In use Models solve 500 expert-written chemistry reasoning problems, offered in multimodal and text-only forms. Expert solution paths also allow a reasoning path score. Tencent Hy4 preview 66.4%
  • LifeSciBench In use Models complete 750 expert-written life science research tasks, often with attached figures, tables, or sequence files. Graded against expert rubrics as score and pass rate. GPT-Rosalind-6 61.3%
  • MedChemBench (OpenAI) In use Models answer chemistry questions from an OpenAI internal set, grouped with OpenAI's life science research evaluations. OpenAI has not published the task format. GPT-Rosalind-6 49.6%
  • ProtocolQA Open-Ended In use Models correct errors in published lab protocols using open-ended questions adapted from LAB-Bench ProtocolQA. Scored as pass@1. GPT-6 Cyber 47.2%
  • MolecularIQ In use Models answer questions about molecular graphs, such as counting, indexing and constrained generation, and a symbolic checker verifies each answer. gpt-oss-120b 47.5%