Benchmark Almanac

ACPBench

Apertus 70B 62.9% Only in system cards

Models answer boolean and multiple-choice questions on 7 planning reasoning tasks over 13 formally described planning domains. Answers are provably correct.

Results are usually reported separately for the Bool and MCQ question types. Published at AAAI 2025.

In the authors’ words

There is an increasing body of work using Large Language Models (LLMs) as agents for orchestrating workflows and making decisions in domains that require planning and multi-step reasoning. As a result, it is imperative to evaluate LLMs on core skills required for planning. In this work, we present ACPBench, a benchmark for evaluating the reasoning tasks in the field of planning. The benchmark consists of 7 reasoning tasks over 13 planning domains. The collection is constructed from planning domains described in a formal language. This allows us to synthesize problems with provably correct solutions across many tasks and domains. Further, it allows us the luxury of scale without additional human effort, i.e., many additional problems can be created automatically. Our extensive evaluation of 22 LLMs and OpenAI o1 reasoning models highlights the significant gap in the reasoning capability of the LLMs. Our findings with OpenAI o1, a multi-turn reasoning model, reveal significant gains in performance on multiple-choice questions, yet surprisingly, no notable progress is made on boolean questions. The ACPBench collection is available at https://ibm.github.io/ACPBench.

Abstract of ACPBench: Reasoning about Action, Change, and Planning (arXiv:2410.05669, CC0)
Made by IBM Research Released Oct 2024 Language reasoning All tasks public Last in a system card Sep 2025 Last model added Sep 2025
Level
University Undergraduates and entry-level professionals
Scored
Checked automatically A program checks the result against an answer key, unit tests or the expected final state.
Answers
Multiple choice
1
Model scored in lab cards
1
System card reports it, from 1 lab

Apertus 70B leads with 62.9%

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 Apertus 70B 62.9%
#ModelScoreSettingDateSource
1 Apertus 70B 62.9% Sep 2025 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
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Near the ceiling (85%) Apertus 70B 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Near the ceiling (85%) Apertus 70B

Labs report it only in system cards

We read the headline results of 479 launch posts from 51 labs, and none of them list this benchmark. Some system cards do, below.

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.

DateDocumentScoreAs the document writes itSection
17 Sep 2025 Apertus 70B technical report 62.9 ACP-Bench Bool (Table 19). ACP-Bench MCQ 43.0 Capabilities

More in Knowledge

All 109 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%
  • 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%
  • BIG-Bench Extra Hard In use Models solve harder replacements for each of the 23 BIG-Bench Hard tasks, 4,520 examples in total. The score is a harmonic mean of task accuracies. Gemma 4 31B IT 74.4%
  • 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%