Benchmark Almanac

MAI human side-by-side evaluation

MAI-Thinking-1 0.07 Only in system cards

Paid raters compare two models' answers to 1,276 English prompts from experts and Copilot logs on a 7-point scale from -1.5 to 1.5.

In-house Microsoft AI evaluation run with Surge AI raters. The score is relative to a named opponent model.

Made by Microsoft AI Released Jun 2026 Overall chat quality Tasks kept private Last in a system card Jun 2026 Last model added Jun 2026
Level
Everyday Most adults, without training
Scored
Ranked by votes People pick the better of two answers, as in an arena, and the votes are turned into ratings.
Answers
Open-ended Free-form text, documents, designs or media judged as a whole.
1
Model scored in lab cards
1
System card reports it, from 1 lab

MAI-Thinking-1 leads with 0.07

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 MAI-Thinking-1 0.07
#ModelScoreSettingDateSource
1 MAI-Thinking-1 0.07 Jun 2026 Model card

Scores over time

All the scores we have, one dot each, so a model tested at several settings appears more than once.

Reported by the lab in its model card
0.07 2026 0.07 2026

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.

DateDocumentScoreAs the document writes itSection
2 Jun 2026 MAI-Thinking-1 technical report 0.07 Overall side-by-side preference vs Sonnet 4.6, scale -1.5 to 1.5 (vs Opus 4.6: -0.07) (Table 14) Capabilities

More in Instructions and chat

All 76 in Instructions and chat
  • IFEval In use Models answer about 500 prompts containing verifiable instructions such as word limits or required keywords. Code checks each instruction for strict and loose accuracy. Gemma 4 31B IT 98.9%
  • IFBench In use 58 new out-of-domain verifiable output constraints. Scored by programmatic constraint checks (strict or loose). Nemotron-Cascade 2 30B-A3B 82.9%
  • MultiChallenge In use Multi-turn conversations testing instruction retention, inference memory, versioned editing and self-coherence. Graded by LLM judge with rubrics. GPT-6.1 Sol 82%
  • Multi-IF In use Models follow verifiable instructions over three-turn conversations in eight languages, extending IFEval. Scored by instruction accuracy at each turn. LFM3-1.7B 89.1%
  • AdvancedIF In use Models respond to over 1,600 prompts with complex, multi-turn, and system-level instructions. A judge model checks each response against expert-written rubrics. MAI-Thinking-1 85%
  • IFStruct In use Models generate JSON or YAML that must follow a requested schema and phrasing constraints, without constrained decoding. A response passes only if every structural constraint holds. LFM3-1.7B 93.7%