LiveResearchBench
Deep research agents write cited reports for user-centric questions that need current information from many live web sources. Rubric-based judges score the reports.
121 GitHub stars. Deep research model reports cite it next to BrowseComp and GAIA.
In the authors’ words
Deep research – producing comprehensive, citation-grounded reports by searching and synthesizing information from hundreds of live web sources – marks an important frontier for agentic systems. To rigorously evaluate this ability, four principles are essential: tasks should be (1) user-centric, reflecting realistic information needs, (2) dynamic, requiring up-to-date information beyond parametric knowledge, (3) unambiguous, ensuring consistent interpretation across users, and (4) multi-faceted and search-intensive, requiring search over numerous web sources and in-depth analysis. Existing benchmarks fall short of these principles, often focusing on narrow domains or posing ambiguous questions that hinder fair comparison. Guided by these principles, we introduce LiveResearchBench, a benchmark of 100 expert-curated tasks spanning daily life, enterprise, and academia, each requiring extensive, dynamic, real-time web search and synthesis. Built with over 1,500 hours of human labor, LiveResearchBench provides a rigorous basis for systematic evaluation. To evaluate citation-grounded long-form reports, we introduce DeepEval, a comprehensive suite covering both content- and report-level quality, including coverage, presentation, citation accuracy and association, consistency and depth of analysis. DeepEval integrates four complementary evaluation protocols, each designed to ensure stable assessment and high agreement with human judgments. Using LiveResearchBench and DeepEval, we conduct a comprehensive evaluation of 17 frontier deep research systems, including single-agent web search, single-agent deep research, and multi-agent systems. Our analysis reveals current strengths, recurring failure modes, and key system components needed to advance reliable, insightful deep research. Our code is available at: https://github.com/SalesforceAIResearch/LiveResearchBench.
- Level
- Expert Specialists with years of training, often over hours of work
- Scored
- Graded by a model A language model scores each response, usually against a rubric.
- Answers
- Open-ended Free-form text, documents, designs or media judged as a whole.
Salesforce AIR Deep Research tops the leaderboard with 76.5
Best score per entry from the benchmark's own leaderboard, read on 2 Nov 2026. Where a model ran with several settings or harnesses, we keep its best. Names in gray aren't in our model list: fine-tunes, agent systems, products and older models. They don't count toward leaders. The best model we track is GPT-5, at 73.7.
The newest model with a score here came out in Aug 2025, and nobody has tested 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
- 76.5 Salesforce AIR Deep Research
- 73.7 GPT-5
- 72.3 Grok-4 Heavy Deep Research
- 69.4 Grok-4 Deep Research
- 67.7 GPT-5 mini
- 67.1 Perplexity Sonar Deep Research
- 66.4 Gemini Deep Research
- 66.3 Manus
- 65.8 Perplexity Sonar Reasoning Pro
- 65.6 GPT-4.1
- 64.4 Perplexity Sonar Reasoning
- 62.9 OpenAI deep research
- 62.3 Claude Sonnet 4
- 61.8 OpenAI o4-mini Deep Research
- 61.8 Claude Opus 4.1
- 61.6
Gemini 2.5 Pro
- 1 Salesforce AIR Deep Research 76.5
- 2 GPT-5 73.7
- 3 Grok-4 Heavy Deep Research 72.3
- 4 Grok-4 Deep Research 69.4
- 5 GPT-5 mini 67.7
- 6 Perplexity Sonar Deep Research 67.1
- 7 Gemini Deep Research 66.4
- 8 Manus 66.3
- 9 Perplexity Sonar Reasoning Pro 65.8
- 10 GPT-4.1 65.6
- 11 Perplexity Sonar Reasoning 64.4
- 12 OpenAI deep research 62.9
- 13 Claude Sonnet 4 62.3
- 14 OpenAI o4-mini Deep Research 61.8
- 15 Claude Opus 4.1 61.8
- 16
Gemini 2.5 Pro Jun 2025 61.6
| # | Entry | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Salesforce AIR Deep Research | 76.5 | Official leaderboard | ||
| 2 | GPT-5 | 73.7 | Open Deep Research | Aug 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 3 | Grok-4 Heavy Deep Research | 72.3 | Official leaderboard | ||
| 4 | Grok-4 Deep Research | 69.4 | Official leaderboard | ||
| 5 | GPT-5 mini | 67.7 | web search | Aug 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 6 | Perplexity Sonar Deep Research | 67.1 | Official leaderboard | ||
| 7 | Gemini Deep Research | 66.4 | Official leaderboard | ||
| 8 | Manus | 66.3 | Official leaderboard | ||
| 9 | Perplexity Sonar Reasoning Pro | 65.8 | web search | Official leaderboard | |
| 10 | GPT-4.1 | 65.6 | web search | Apr 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 11 | Perplexity Sonar Reasoning | 64.4 | web search | Official leaderboard | |
| 12 | OpenAI deep research | 62.9 | Feb 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 13 | Claude Sonnet 4 | 62.3 | web search | May 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 14 | OpenAI o4-mini Deep Research | 61.8 | Official leaderboard | ||
| 15 | Claude Opus 4.1 | 61.8 | web search | Aug 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 16 | | 61.6 | web search | Jun 2025 | Official leaderboard |
Number one over time
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.
No lab model card reports it yet
We read the headline results of 479 launch posts from 51 labs, and none of them list this benchmark.
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%