Benchmark Almanac

DeepSearchQA

Kimi K3 95% leads since Jul 2026 In use

Questions that need multi-step search and synthesis. Final answers graded against references.

Official grading needs the gemini-2.5-flash autorater and prompt. Other judges shift results. Only Kaggle starter code, no GitHub repo.

In the authors’ words

We introduce DeepSearchQA, a 900-prompt benchmark for evaluating agents on difficult multi-step information-seeking tasks across 17 different fields. Unlike traditional benchmarks that target single answer retrieval or broad-spectrum factuality, DeepSearchQA features a dataset of challenging, handcrafted tasks designed to evaluate an agent's ability to execute complex search plans to generate exhaustive answer lists. This shift in design explicitly tests three critical, yet under-evaluated capabilities: 1) systematic collation of fragmented information from disparate sources, 2) de-duplication and entity resolution to ensure precision, and 3) the ability to reason about stopping criteria within an open-ended search space. Each task is structured as a causal chain, where discovering information for one step is dependent on the successful completion of the previous one, stressing long-horizon planning and context retention. All tasks are grounded in the open web with objectively verifiable answer sets. Our comprehensive evaluation of state-of-the-art agent architectures reveals significant performance limitations: even the most advanced models struggle to balance high recall with precision. We observe distinct failure modes ranging from premature stopping (under-retrieval) to hedging behaviors, where agents cast an overly wide net of low-confidence answers to artificially boost recall. These findings highlight critical headroom in current agent designs and position DeepSearchQA as an essential diagnostic tool for driving future research toward more robust, deep-research capabilities.

Abstract of DeepSearchQA: Bridging the Comprehensiveness Gap for Deep Research Agents (arXiv:2601.20975, CC0)
Made by Google DeepMind Released Jan 2026 Deep research All tasks public Last in a launch post Oct 2026 Last model added Oct 2026 Scores refreshed 2 Nov 2026
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.
22
Models scored in lab cards
14
Launch posts list it, from 9 labs
12
System cards report it, from 5 labs

2 models share the top score of 95%

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 Kimi K3 95%
  2. 2 Claude Opus 5 95%
  3. 3 Claude Opus 4.8 93.1%
  4. 4 Step 3.7 Flash 92.8%
  5. 5 Kimi K2.6 92.5%
  6. 6 Claude Opus 4.6 91.3%
  7. 7 Tencent Hy3 91%
  8. 8 Muse Spark 1.3 90.3%
  9. 9 Claude Sonnet 4.6 89.2%
  10. 10 Claude Opus 4.7 89.1%
  11. 11 MiMo-V2-Pro 86.7%
  12. 12 Muse Spark 1.1 84.9%
  13. 13 Grok 4.6 81.6%
  14. 14 Beam 1.0 80.1%
  15. 15 Seed2.0 Pro 77.4%
  16. 16 ERNIE 5.1 77.3%
  17. 17 Kimi K2.5 77.1%
  18. 18 Muse Spark 74.8%
  19. 19 Muse Glimmer 74.6%
  20. 20 Mercury 3 71.3%
  21. 21 Grok 4.5 38.4%
  22. 22 Mercury 2.5 34%
#ModelScoreSettingDateSource
1 Kimi K3 95% Jul 2026 Model card
2 Claude Opus 5 95% Jul 2026 Model card
3 Claude Opus 4.8 93.1% May 2026 Model card
4 Step 3.7 Flash 92.8% May 2026 Model card
5 Kimi K2.6 92.5% Apr 2026 Model card
6 Claude Opus 4.6 91.3% Feb 2026 Model card
7 Tencent Hy3 91% Jul 2026 Model card
8 Muse Spark 1.3 90.3% Sep 2026 Model card
9 Claude Sonnet 4.6 89.2% Feb 2026 Model card
10 Claude Opus 4.7 89.1% Apr 2026 Model card
11 MiMo-V2-Pro 86.7% Mar 2026 Model card
12 Muse Spark 1.1 84.9% Jul 2026 Model card
13 Grok 4.6 81.6% Aug 2026 Model card
14 Beam 1.0 80.1% Oct 2026 Model card
15 Seed2.0 Pro 77.4% Feb 2026 Model card
16 ERNIE 5.1 77.3% May 2026 Model card
17 Kimi K2.5 77.1% Jan 2026 Model card
18 Muse Spark 74.8% Apr 2026 Model card
19 Muse Glimmer 74.6% Aug 2026 Model card
20 Mercury 3 71.3% Oct 2026 Model card
21 Grok 4.5 38.4% Jul 2026 Model card
22 Mercury 2.5 34% Sep 2026 Model card

The benchmark's own leaderboard has 12 entries, 10 of them models we track. We plot every source in the charts below.

Number one over time

Lab claims count from the day the card came out, independent runs from the model’s release. We draw one row each for the benchmark’s own leaderboard and what labs claim in their cards.

OpenAI Moonshot AI Anthropic
Own leaderboard Not tested since Mar 2026
GPT-5 Pro 65.2%
Lab claims Passed 85% in Feb 2026, by Claude Opus 4.6
Kimi K3 95%

The best score passed 85% in Feb 2026

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 Reported by the lab in its model card Best so far
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2025 2026 Near the ceiling (85%) Kimi K3 Claude Opus 4.6 Kimi K2.5 GPT-5 Pro GPT-5 OpenAI deep research 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2025 2026 Near the ceiling (85%) Kimi K3 Kimi K2.5

5 labs put it in a launch post in the last six months

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.

Moonshot AI
ByteDance Seed
Xiaomi Corp
Meta
Baidu
StepFun
Tencent
Inception Labs
Reflection
DateLaunch postScoreAs the post writes it
19 Oct 2026 Mercury 3 71.3 DeepSearchQA
5 Oct 2026 Beam 1.0 80.1 DeepSearchQA w/context management
8 Sep 2026 Mercury 2.5 34 DSQA (@10 tool calls)
2 Sep 2026 Muse Spark 1.3 90.3 DeepSearchQA (Agentic browsing)
10 Aug 2026 Muse Glimmer 74.6 DeepSearch QA
16 Jul 2026 Kimi K3 95 DeepSearchQA (F1)
2 Jul 2026 Tencent Hy3 91 DeepSearchQA
29 May 2026 Step 3.7 Flash 92.8 deepsearchQA (F1), acc 81.7
9 May 2026 ERNIE 5.1 77.3 DeepSearchQA (F1)
20 Apr 2026 Kimi K2.6 92.5 DeepSearchQA (f1-score)
8 Apr 2026 Muse Spark 74.8 DeepSearchQA (Agentic Search)
18 Mar 2026 MiMo-V2-Pro 86.7 DeepSearch QA-F1
14 Feb 2026 Seed2.0 Pro 77.4 DeepSearchQA
27 Jan 2026 Kimi K2.5 77.1 DeepSearchQA

12 system cards report it, from 5 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.

DateDocumentScoreAs the document writes itSection
19 Oct 2026 Muse Glimmer technical report 74.6 DeepSearchQA, high, 75.3 xhigh (Tables 2 and 5) Capabilities
12 Aug 2026 Grok 4.6 model card 81.6 DeepSearchQA, internal implementation, accuracy, high (6.2) Capabilities
27 Jul 2026 Kimi K3 technical report 95 DeepSearchQA (F1) (Table 2) Capabilities
24 Jul 2026 Claude Opus 5 system card 95 DeepSearchQA mean F1 at max effort, 980k-token budget, printed on chart (8.10.3, Figure 8.10.3.A) Capabilities
14 Jul 2026 Grok 4.5 model card 38.4 DeepSearchQA, internal implementation, accuracy, high (6.2) Capabilities
9 Jul 2026 Muse Spark 1.1 system card 84.9 DeepSearchQA (Figure 44) Capabilities
28 May 2026 Claude Opus 4.8 system card 93.1 DeepSearchQA F1, max effort, 1M-token budget, no compaction (fully correct 84.8%) (Table 8.10.3.B) Capabilities
16 Apr 2026 Claude Opus 4.7 system card 89.1 DeepSearchQA F1, adaptive thinking at max effort, compaction up to 10M tokens. Fully correct 80.7 (Table 8.8.3.B) Capabilities
17 Feb 2026 Claude Sonnet 4.6 system card 89.2 DeepSearchQA F1, single agent, adaptive thinking, max effort, up to 10M tokens; multi-agent 91.1 (Figure 2.20.3.A, 2.20.3.1) Capabilities
14 Feb 2026 Seed2.0 Pro model card 77.4 DeepSearchQA (Table 11) Capabilities
5 Feb 2026 Claude Opus 4.6 system card 91.3 DeepSearchQA F1, best single-agent configuration, adaptive thinking, max effort, compaction (2.21.3.2, Figure 2.21.3.1.A); multi-agent 92.5 Capabilities
30 Jan 2026 Kimi K2.5 technical report 77.1 DeepSearchQA (Table 4) Capabilities

More in Tool use

All 125 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%
  • MCPMark In use Agent stress-tests realistic MCP tool use (GitHub, Notion, Postgres, browser). Graded by programmatic verification scripts. Kimi K3 94.5%