CombiBench
Provers solve 100 combinatorics problems formalized in Lean 4, from middle school to IMO and university level. Lean checks each proof.
DeepSeek-Prover-V2 reports it in a with-solution setting, where fill-in-the-blank answers are given.
In the authors’ words
Neurosymbolic approaches integrating large language models with formal reasoning have recently achieved human-level performance on mathematics competition problems in algebra, geometry and number theory. In comparison, combinatorics remains a challenging domain, characterized by a lack of appropriate benchmarks and theorem libraries. To address this gap, we introduce CombiBench, a comprehensive benchmark comprising 100 combinatorial problems, each formalized in Lean 4 and paired with its corresponding informal statement. The problem set covers a wide spectrum of difficulty levels, ranging from middle school to IMO and university level, and span over ten combinatorial topics. CombiBench is suitable for testing IMO solving capabilities since it includes all IMO combinatorial problems since 2000 (except IMO 2004 P3 as its statement contain an images). Furthermore, we provide a comprehensive and standardized evaluation framework, dubbed Fine-Eval (for Fill-in-the-blank $in$ Lean Evaluation), for formal mathematics. It accommodates not only proof-based problems but also, for the first time, the evaluation of fill-in-the-blank questions. Using Fine-Eval as the evaluation method and Kimina Lean Server as the backend, we benchmark several LLMs on CombiBench and observe that their capabilities for formally solving combinatorial problems remain limited. Among all models tested (none of which has been trained for this particular task), Kimina-Prover attains the best results, solving 7 problems (out of 100) under both “with solution” and “without solution” scenarios. We open source the benchmark dataset alongside with the code of the proposed evaluation method at https://github.com/MoonshotAI/CombiBench/.
- Level
- Competition The strongest students, in olympiad-style contests
- Scored
- Checked automatically A program checks the result against an answer key, unit tests or the expected final state.
- Answers
- Written proof
Seed-Prover 1.5 leads with 48% among models released by Dec 2025
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 Dec 2025, 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
- 1
Seed-Prover 1.5 48%
- 2
Seed-Prover 30%
- 3
DeepSeek-Prover-V2-671B 10%
| # | Model | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | | 48% | Dec 2025 | Model card | |
| 2 | | 30% | Jul 2025 | Model card | |
| 3 | | 10% | Apr 2025 | Model card |
3 models have held number one since its release in May 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 Dec 2025
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 19 Dec 2025 | 48 | Combibench | |
| 31 Jul 2025 | 30 | CombiBench (Medium) |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 30 Apr 2025 | | 10 | CombiBench with-solution setting, CoT, Pass@16, 10 of 100 solved (Table 5). Version 1 reported 12 | Capabilities |
More in Math
- IMO-AnswerBench In use 400 olympiad problems with short verifiable answers, robustified against memorization. Scored by answer match. GLM-5.2 91%
- AIME 2026 In use Models solve the 30 integer-answer problems from the 2026 AIME I and II math competitions. Scored by exact answer match. GPT-5.5 100%
- HMMT 2026 In use Models solve the 33 final-answer problems from the February 2026 Harvard-MIT Mathematics Tournament. Scored by exact answer match. GPT-5.5 98.5%
- MathArena (Apex, IMO, USAMO) In use Evaluates models on newly released math competitions after release. Final-answer or human/LLM-judged proof scores. Claude Opus 4.8 81.3%
- PolyMath In use Models solve 9,000 parallel math problems in 18 languages across four difficulty levels, from school math to frontier math. Final answers are checked.
Qwen3.7-Max 86.5%
- USAMO 2026 In use Models write full proofs for the six problems of the 2026 USA Mathematical Olympiad. Judges grade each proof from 0 to 7 against rubrics. GPT-5.5 98.2%