Benchmark Almanac

AHELM

Gemini 2.5 Pro Jun 2025 80.3 leads since Aug 2025 Not in model cards

Audio-language models are scored across 10 aspects with standard prompts. The suite combines existing datasets with two new ones, PARADE for stereotypes and CoRe-Bench for conversational reasoning.

Covers fairness and safety as well as perception and reasoning.

In the authors’ words

Evaluations of audio-language models (ALMs) – multimodal models that take interleaved audio and text as input and output text – are hindered by the lack of standardized benchmarks; most benchmarks measure only one or two capabilities and omit evaluative aspects such as fairness or safety. Furthermore, comparison across models is difficult as separate evaluations test a limited number of models and use different prompting methods and inference parameters. To address these shortfalls, we introduce AHELM, a benchmark that aggregates various datasets – including 2 new synthetic audio-text datasets called PARADE, which evaluates the ALMs on avoiding stereotypes, and CoRe-Bench, which measures reasoning over conversational audio through inferential multi-turn question answering – to holistically measure the performance of ALMs across 10 aspects we have identified as important to the development and usage of ALMs: audio perception, knowledge, reasoning, emotion detection, bias, fairness, multilinguality, robustness, toxicity, and safety. We also standardize the prompts, inference parameters, and evaluation metrics to ensure equitable comparisons across models. We test 14 open-weight and closed-API ALMs from 3 developers and 3 additional simple baseline systems each consisting of an automatic speech recognizer and a language model. Our results show that while Gemini 2.5 Pro ranks top in 5 out of 10 aspects, it exhibits group unfairness (p=0.01) on ASR tasks whereas most of the other models do not. We also find that the baseline systems perform reasonably well on AHELM, with one ranking 6th overall despite having only speech-to-text capabilities. For transparency, all raw prompts, model generations, and outputs are available on our website at https://crfm.stanford.edu/helm/audio/v1.0.0. AHELM is intended to be a living benchmark and new datasets and models will be added over time.

Abstract of AHELM: A Holistic Evaluation of Audio-Language Models (arXiv:2508.21376, CC0)
Made by Stanford CRFM Released Aug 2025 Audio understanding and voice All tasks public Last model added Sep 2025 Scores refreshed 2 Nov 2026
Level
Everyday Most adults, without training
Scored
Checked automatically A program checks the result against an answer key, unit tests or the expected final state.
Answers
Short answer A number, word or short string matched to a key.
16
Entries on its own leaderboard, 10 models we track

Gemini 2.5 Pro leads with 80.3 among models released by Sep 2025

Best score per entry from the benchmark's own leaderboard, read on 2 Nov 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 newest model with a score here came out in Sep 2025, and nobody has tested a newer one. Among the 20 highest-ranked models on the capability index, these have no score yet:

  1. 1 Gemini 2.5 Pro Jun 2025 80.3
  2. 2 Gemini 2.0 Flash Feb 2025 63.3
  3. 3 gpt-4o-audio-preview-2024-12-17 60.9
  4. 4 Gemini 1.5 Pro Sep 2024 59.2
  5. 5 gpt-4o-mini-transcribe_gpt-4o-2024-11-20 56.6
  6. 6 gpt-4o-transcribe_gpt-4o-2024-11-20 54.4
  7. 7 Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite 54.0
  8. 8 Gemini 2.5 Flash Sep 2025 49.7
  9. 9 Qwen2.5-Omni-7B 49.5
  10. 10 whisper-1_gpt-4o-2024-11-20 48.9
  11. 11 gpt-4o-audio-preview-2024-10-01 43.9
  12. 12 gpt-4o-mini-audio-preview-2024-12-17 40.5
  13. 13 Gemini 1.5 Flash Sep 2024 40.1
  14. 14 Gemini 1.5 Pro May 2024 36.2
  15. 15 Qwen2-Audio-7B-Instruct 29.3
  16. 16 Gemini 1.5 Flash May 2024 22.0
#EntryScoreSettingDateSource
1 Gemini 2.5 Pro Jun 2025 80.3 Jun 2025 Official leaderboard
2 Gemini 2.0 Flash Feb 2025 63.3 Feb 2025 Official leaderboard
3 gpt-4o-audio-preview-2024-12-17 60.9 Dec 2024 Official leaderboard
4 Gemini 1.5 Pro Sep 2024 59.2 Sep 2024 Official leaderboard
5 gpt-4o-mini-transcribe_gpt-4o-2024-11-20 56.6 Nov 2024 Official leaderboard
6 gpt-4o-transcribe_gpt-4o-2024-11-20 54.4 Nov 2024 Official leaderboard
7 Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite 54.0 Feb 2025 Official leaderboard
8 Gemini 2.5 Flash Sep 2025 49.7 Sep 2025 Official leaderboard
9 Qwen2.5-Omni-7B 49.5 Mar 2025 Official leaderboard
10 whisper-1_gpt-4o-2024-11-20 48.9 Nov 2024 Official leaderboard
11 gpt-4o-audio-preview-2024-10-01 43.9 Oct 2024 Official leaderboard
12 gpt-4o-mini-audio-preview-2024-12-17 40.5 Dec 2024 Official leaderboard
13 Gemini 1.5 Flash Sep 2024 40.1 Aug 2024 Official leaderboard
14 Gemini 1.5 Pro May 2024 36.2 May 2024 Official leaderboard
15 Qwen2-Audio-7B-Instruct 29.3 Aug 2024 Official leaderboard
16 Gemini 1.5 Flash May 2024 22.0 May 2024 Official leaderboard

Number one over time

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

Google DeepMind
Own leaderboard Not tested since Sep 2025

Scores over time

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
20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0 2024 2025 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0 2024 2025

No lab model card reports it yet

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

More in Audio and video

All 168 in Audio and video
  • Video-MMMU In use 300 expert-level lecture videos with questions testing perception, comprehension and adaptation of knowledge. Accuracy. Qwen 3.8 Max 88.7%
  • LVBench In use Hours-long video understanding with multiple-choice questions on reasoning, grounding and summarization. Gemini 4 Argon 91.7%
  • MMVU In use 3,000 expert-annotated questions on videos across 27 disciplines. Multiple-choice and open-ended accuracy. Qwen 3.8 Max 82.4%
  • MLVU In use Multi-task long video understanding (minutes to hours) with multiple-choice and generation tasks. Accuracy. Qwen 3.8 Max 90.8%
  • VoiceBench In use Spoken instructions with speaker, environment and content variation. Voice assistant responses scored by GPT judge or rules. Qwen3.5-Omni-Plus 93.1%
  • TVBench In use Models answer multiple-choice questions on 10 temporal video tasks, such as action counting and ordering, that static frames cannot solve. Scored by accuracy. Qwen 3.8 Max 81.9%