BioSecBench-Surveillance
Agents turn raw pathogen sequencing data into surveillance results. The endpoint pass rate excludes refused runs.
Only a public subset is on GitHub. LatchBio keeps the full set under restricted access.
In the authors’ words
As pathogen genomic surveillance scales, the bottleneck is shifting from data generation to analysis. We present BioSecBench-Surveillance, a verifiable benchmark of 100 evaluations testing whether AI agents can infer the right analysis pipeline from raw sequencing data and surveillance context. Each evaluation gives an agent only the data and context a human analyst would have, then grades its structured answer deterministically. The tasks span seven categories, from taxonomic classification to genetic-engineering detection, across diverse sample types and sequencing technologies. Across 3,962 gradable attempts from sixteen model-harness pairs, the strongest configuration cleared only about half. Opus 4.8 with PI led at 50.2 percent, with a 95 percent confidence interval of 40.1 to 60.3 percent across 83 evaluations, tied with GPT-5.5 with Codex at 50.2 percent, with a 95 percent confidence interval of 40.8 to 59.6 percent, followed by Opus 4.7 with PI at 49.6 percent, with a 95 percent confidence interval of 40.0 to 59.2 percent, and Sonnet 4.6 with PI at 48.6 percent, with a 95 percent confidence interval of 38.9 to 58.3 percent. Even when agents invoked the correct workflows, their mistakes came from the choices around them, such as which references, thresholds, filters, and normalization to apply. BioSecBench-Surveillance provides a standard for measuring whether agents can be trusted to perform genomic surveillance when the next outbreak arrives.
- Level
- Expert Specialists with years of training, often over hours of work
- Scored
- Checked automatically A program checks the result against an answer key, unit tests or the expected final state.
- Answers
- Agent task Many steps in a terminal, browser, desktop, app, game or robot.
Claude Opus 5.5 leads with 60.8%
Best score per model from the benchmark's own leaderboard, read on 2 Nov 2026. Where a model ran with several settings or harnesses, we keep its best.
- 60.8 Claude Opus 5.5
- 59.8
Gemini 4 Argon
- 54.6 Claude Sonnet 5.5
- 51.5 Claude Opus 5
- 51.5
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash
- 50.8 GPT-6.1 Sol
- 49.0 Claude Fable 5.1
- 48.5 GPT-6 Astra
- 48.0 Grok 4.6
- 48.0 Grok 4.7
- 47.7 GPT-6 Sol
- 47.3 GPT-5.6 Sol
- 47.1 GPT-5.5
- 46.9 Claude Opus 4.8
- 45.8 Claude Opus 4.7
- 44.1
Gemini 3.8 Flash
- 43.2 GPT-5.6 Luna
- 41.5
Gemini 3.7 Flash
- 41.5 GPT-6 Luna
- 39.9 GPT-6.1 Terra
- 39.0 Claude Sonnet 5
- 38.6 Kimi K3
- 36.6 GLM-5.3
- 34.5 Claude Sonnet 4.6
- 34.0
Mistral Large 4
- 21.2
Nemotron 3 Ultra
- 14.1
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B-A3B
- 1 Claude Opus 5.5 LSVP 60.8%
- 2
Gemini 4 Argon 59.8%
- 3 Claude Sonnet 5.5 LSVP 54.6%
- 4 Claude Opus 5 51.5%
- 5
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 51.5%
- 6 GPT-6.1 Sol 50.8%
- 7 Claude Fable 5.1 LSVP 49%
- 8 GPT-6 Astra 48.5%
- 9 Grok 4.6 48%
- 10 Grok 4.7 48%
- 11 GPT-6 Sol 47.7%
- 12 GPT-5.6 Sol 47.3%
- 13 GPT-5.5 47.1%
- 14 Claude Opus 4.8 46.9%
- 15 Claude Opus 4.7 45.8%
- 16
Gemini 3.8 Flash 44.1%
- 17 GPT-5.6 Luna 43.2%
- 18
Gemini 3.7 Flash 41.5%
- 19 GPT-6 Luna 41.5%
- 20 GPT-6.1 Terra 39.9%
- 21 Claude Sonnet 5 39%
- 22 Kimi K3 38.6%
- 23 GLM-5.3 36.6%
- 24 Claude Sonnet 4.6 34.5%
- 25
Mistral Large 4 34%
- 26
Nemotron 3 Ultra 21.2%
- 27
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B-A3B 14.1%
| # | Model | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Claude Opus 5.5 | 60.8% | LSVP, Pi | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 2 | | 59.8% | Pi | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 3 | Claude Sonnet 5.5 | 54.6% | LSVP, Claude Code | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 4 | Claude Opus 5 | 51.5% | Pi | Jul 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 5 | | 51.5% | Pi | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 6 | GPT-6.1 Sol | 50.8% | Pi | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 7 | Claude Fable 5.1 | 49% | LSVP, Pi | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 8 | GPT-6 Astra | 48.5% | Pi | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 9 | Grok 4.6 | 48% | Grok Build | Aug 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 10 | Grok 4.7 | 48% | Pi | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 11 | GPT-6 Sol | 47.7% | Pi | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 12 | GPT-5.6 Sol | 47.3% | Codex | Jul 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 13 | GPT-5.5 | 47.1% | Pi | Apr 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 14 | Claude Opus 4.8 | 46.9% | Pi | May 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 15 | Claude Opus 4.7 | 45.8% | Pi | Apr 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 16 | | 44.1% | Pi | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 17 | GPT-5.6 Luna | 43.2% | Codex | Jul 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 18 | | 41.5% | Pi | Aug 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 19 | GPT-6 Luna | 41.5% | Pi | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 20 | GPT-6.1 Terra | 39.9% | Pi | Oct 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 21 | Claude Sonnet 5 | 39% | Pi | Jun 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 22 | Kimi K3 | 38.6% | Pi | Jul 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 23 | GLM-5.3 | 36.6% | Pi | Aug 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 24 | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | 34.5% | Claude Code | Feb 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 25 | | 34% | Pi | Oct 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 26 | | 21.2% | Pi | Jun 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 27 | | 14.1% | Pi | Aug 2026 | Official leaderboard |
Labs report scores for 1 model in their cards. We plot every source in the charts below.
4 models have held number one since its release in Jul 2026
Lab claims count from the day the card came out, independent runs from the model’s release.
Scores over time
All the scores we have, one dot each, so a model tested at several settings appears more than once.
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.
| Date | Document | Score | As the document writes it | Section |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 21 Sep 2026 | Grok 4.7 model card | 48 | BioSecBench Surveillance, endpoint pass rate, xhigh, Grok Build harness (7.1 table) | Bio and chem risk |
More in Biology and chemistry
- 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%
- 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-6 Astra 37.1%
- 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-6 Astra 60.3%
- MolecularIQ In use Models answer questions about molecular graphs, such as counting, indexing and constrained generation, and a symbolic checker verifies each answer.
Intern-S2-397B 62.4%
- TOMG-Bench In use Models generate molecules from natural language requests in three tasks: molecule editing, molecule optimization and customized generation. Each output is checked for validity and for meeting the requested properties.
Intern-S2-397B 66.8%
- BABE Fading Models reason from experimental results in peer-reviewed biology papers to draw conclusions, with causal and cross-scale inference.
Seed2.0 Lite (0428) 57.9%