BrowseComp-ZH
Agents browse the Chinese web to answer 289 multi-hop questions with short, verifiable answers. Scored by accuracy.
In the authors’ words
As large language models (LLMs) evolve into tool-using agents, the ability to browse the web in real-time has become a critical yardstick for measuring their reasoning and retrieval competence. Existing benchmarks such as BrowseComp concentrate on English and overlook the linguistic, infrastructural, and censorship-related complexities of other major information ecosystems – most notably Chinese. To address this gap, we introduce BrowseComp-ZH, a high-difficulty benchmark purpose-built to comprehensively evaluate LLM agents on the Chinese web. BrowseComp-ZH consists of 289 multi-hop questions spanning 11 diverse domains. Each question is reverse-engineered from a short, objective, and easily verifiable answer (e.g., a date, number, or proper noun). A two-stage quality control protocol is applied to strive for high question difficulty and answer uniqueness. We benchmark over 20 state-of-the-art language models and agentic search systems on our proposed BrowseComp-ZH. Despite their strong conversational and retrieval capabilities, most models struggle severely: a large number achieve accuracy rates below 10%, and only a handful exceed 20%. Even the best-performing system, OpenAI's DeepResearch, reaches just 42.9%. These results demonstrate the considerable difficulty of BrowseComp-ZH, where success demands not only effective retrieval strategies, but also sophisticated reasoning and information reconciliation – capabilities that current models still struggle to master. Our dataset, construction guidelines, and benchmark results have been publicly released at https://github.com/PALIN2018/BrowseComp-ZH.
- 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
- Short answer A number, word or short string matched to a key.
Seed2.0 Pro leads with 82.4% among models released by Feb 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.
The newest model with a score here came out in Feb 2026, and nobody has reported a newer one. Among the 20 highest-ranked models on the capability index, these have no score yet:
- GPT-6 Astra
- Claude Opus 5.5
- GPT-6.1 Terra
- GPT-6.1 Sol
- and 16 more
- 82.4
Seed2.0 Pro
- 81.3
Seed1.8
- 77.7
LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601
- 73.7
Step 3.5 Flash
- 72.7 GLM-5
- 70.3
Qwen3.5 397B-A17B
- 69.9
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- 66.6 GLM-4.7
- 65.0
DeepSeek-V3.2
- 64.7
ERNIE 5.0
- 62.3 Kimi K2 Thinking
- 51.2 Grok 4 Fast
- 50.5
UI-TARS-2
- 49.2
DeepSeek-V3.1
- 48.5
MiniMax-M2
- 47.9
DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp
- 45.0
DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus
- 1
Seed2.0 Pro 82.4%
- 2
Seed1.8 81.3%
- 3
LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601 77.7%
- 4
Step 3.5 Flash 73.7%
- 5 GLM-5 72.7%
- 6
Qwen3.5 397B-A17B 70.3%
- 7
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B 69.9%
- 8 GLM-4.7 66.6%
- 9
DeepSeek-V3.2 65%
- 10
ERNIE 5.0 64.7%
- 11 Kimi K2 Thinking 62.3%
- 12 Grok 4 Fast 51.2%
- 13
UI-TARS-2 50.5%
- 14
DeepSeek-V3.1 49.2%
- 15
MiniMax-M2 48.5%
- 16
DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp 47.9%
- 17
DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus 45%
| # | Model | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | | 82.4% | Feb 2026 | Model card | |
| 2 | | 81.3% | Dec 2025 | Model card | |
| 3 | | 77.7% | Jan 2026 | Model card | |
| 4 | | 73.7% | Feb 2026 | Model card | |
| 5 | GLM-5 | 72.7% | Feb 2026 | Model card | |
| 6 | | 70.3% | Feb 2026 | Model card | |
| 7 | | 69.9% | Feb 2026 | Model card | |
| 8 | GLM-4.7 | 66.6% | Dec 2025 | Model card | |
| 9 | | 65% | Dec 2025 | Model card | |
| 10 | | 64.7% | Feb 2026 | Model card | |
| 11 | Kimi K2 Thinking | 62.3% | Nov 2025 | Model card | |
| 12 | Grok 4 Fast | 51.2% | Sep 2025 | Model card | |
| 13 | | 50.5% | Sep 2025 | Model card | |
| 14 | | 49.2% | Aug 2025 | Model card | |
| 15 | | 48.5% | Oct 2025 | Model card | |
| 16 | | 47.9% | Sep 2025 | Model card | |
| 17 | | 45% | Sep 2025 | Model card |
7 models have held number one since its release in Apr 2025
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 headline it less often now, last in Feb 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 24 Feb 2026 | 69.9 | Browsecomp-zh | |
| 16 Feb 2026 | 70.3 | BrowseComp-zh | |
| 14 Feb 2026 | 82.4 | BrowseComp-zh | |
| 11 Feb 2026 | GLM-5 | 72.7 | BrowseComp-Zh |
| 6 Feb 2026 | 64.7 | BrowseComp-zh | |
| 2 Feb 2026 | 73.7 | Best of BrowseComp-ZH 66.9 / BrowseComp-ZH (w/ Context Manager) 73.7 | |
| 14 Jan 2026 | 77.7 | Best of BrowseComp-zh (Pass@1, 24 answers revised) 69.0 / with context management 77.7 | |
| 22 Dec 2025 | GLM-4.7 | 66.6 | BrowseComp-Zh |
| 18 Dec 2025 | 81.3 | BrowseComp-zh | |
| 1 Dec 2025 | 65 | BrowseCompZh (Pass@1) | |
| 6 Nov 2025 | Kimi K2 Thinking | 62.3 | BrowseComp-ZH, w/ tools |
| 27 Oct 2025 | 48.5 | BrowseComp-zh | |
| 29 Sep 2025 | 47.9 | BrowseComp-zh | |
| 22 Sep 2025 | 45 | BrowseComp-zh | |
| 19 Sep 2025 | Grok 4 Fast | 51.2 | BrowseComp (zh) pass@1 |
| 2 Sep 2025 | 50.5 | BC-zh 32.1 GUI-only (50.5 with GUI-SDK) | |
| 21 Aug 2025 | 49.2 | BrowseComp_zh |
8 system cards report it, from 6 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 21 Mar 2026 | | 81.3 | BrowseComp-zh (Table 4). The 2.3 text says 78.5 | Capabilities |
| 17 Feb 2026 | GLM-5 technical report | 72.7 | BrowseComp-ZH (Table 7) | Capabilities |
| 14 Feb 2026 | | 82.4 | BrowseComp-zh, search agent (Table 11) | Capabilities |
| 11 Feb 2026 | | 66.9 | BrowseComp-ZH, avg@3 (Table 5) | Capabilities |
| 4 Feb 2026 | | 64.7 | BrowseComp-zh (Table 2) | Capabilities |
| 23 Jan 2026 | | 77.7 | BrowseComp-zh (Pass@1), 24 answers revised, with context management (Table 2). Without context management 69.0 | Capabilities |
| 1 Dec 2025 | | 65 | BrowseCompZh (Pass@1), DeepSeek-V3.2 Thinking (Table 2) | Capabilities |
| 29 Sep 2025 | | 47.9 | BrowseComp_zh (Acc.), search agent, DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp (Table 1) | Capabilities |
More in Tool use
- AutomationBench In use Agent completes end-to-end business workflows inside a simulated company exposing dozens of REST APIs. Graded on resulting state.
Gemini 4 Carbon 53.9%
- MCP Atlas In use Multi-step workflows over real MCP servers. Scores tool-use competency on realistic tasks.
Muse Spark 1.1 88.1%
- BFCL V4 In use Models call functions and tools, including multi-turn agentic tasks with web search and memory. Checked against expected calls and outcomes.
Qwen3.7-Max 75%
- τ³-bench Banking In use Agents act as banking customer-service reps over many turns with a simulated user, following policy. Pass^1 on the final database state.
Qwen 3.8 Max 55.1%
- Claw-Eval In use 300 human-verified agent tasks (service orchestration, multimodal, multi-turn dialogue) audited via traces and snapshots. Rubric scores with Pass^3 consistency. Claude Sonnet 4.6 81.4%
- DeepSearchQA In use Questions that need multi-step search and synthesis. Final answers graded against references. Kimi K3 95%