Multi-IF
Models follow verifiable instructions over three-turn conversations in eight languages, extending IFEval. Scored by instruction accuracy at each turn.
In the authors’ words
Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated impressive capabilities in various tasks, including instruction following, which is crucial for aligning model outputs with user expectations. However, evaluating LLMs' ability to follow instructions remains challenging due to the complexity and subjectivity of human language. Current benchmarks primarily focus on single-turn, monolingual instructions, which do not adequately reflect the complexities of real-world applications that require handling multi-turn and multilingual interactions. To address this gap, we introduce Multi-IF, a new benchmark designed to assess LLMs' proficiency in following multi-turn and multilingual instructions. Multi-IF, which utilizes a hybrid framework combining LLM and human annotators, expands upon the IFEval by incorporating multi-turn sequences and translating the English prompts into another 7 languages, resulting in a dataset of 4,501 multilingual conversations, where each has three turns. Our evaluation of 14 state-of-the-art LLMs on Multi-IF reveals that it presents a significantly more challenging task than existing benchmarks. All the models tested showed a higher rate of failure in executing instructions correctly with each additional turn. For example, o1-preview drops from 0.877 at the first turn to 0.707 at the third turn in terms of average accuracy over all languages. Moreover, languages with non-Latin scripts (Hindi, Russian, and Chinese) generally exhibit higher error rates, suggesting potential limitations in the models' multilingual capabilities. We release Multi-IF prompts and the evaluation code base to encourage further research in this critical area.
- Level
- Everyday Most adults, without training
- Scored
- Checked automatically A program checks the result against an answer key, unit tests or the expected final state.
- Answers
- Open-ended Free-form text, documents, designs or media judged as a whole.
LFM3-1.7B leads with 89.1%
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.
- 89.1 LFM3-1.7B
- 85.6
ERNIE 5.0
- 84.4 LFM2.5-24B-A2B
- 80.6
Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking
- 80.1 LFM2.5-2.6B
- 79.9 LFM2.5-8B-A1B
- 79.1
Qwen3-VL-235B-A22B
- 77.8
Qwen3-Next-80B-A3B
- 76.6
ERNIE-4.5-300B-A47B
- 74.8
Qwen3-14B
- 74.7
Apertus 70B
- 73.5
EXAONE 4.0 32B
- 73.0
Qwen3-32B
- 72.2
Qwen3-30B-A3B
- 71.9
Qwen3-235B-A22B
- 71.2
Qwen3-8B
- 69.3 LFM2.5-1.2B-Thinking
- 67.0 GPT-4.1 mini
- 66.3
Qwen3-4B
- 64.0
Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B
- 63.3
ERNIE-4.5-21B-A3B-Thinking
- 61.0 LFM2.5-1.2B-Instruct
- 59.4 LFM2.5-VL-3B
- 58.2 LFM2-8B-A1B
- 57.2 GPT-4.1 nano
- 51.2
Qwen3-1.7B
- 45.3 LFM2-1.2B
- 37.3
North Micro Vision Instruct
- 1 LFM3-1.7B 89.1%
- 2
ERNIE 5.0 85.6%
- 3 LFM2.5-24B-A2B 84.4%
- 4
Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking Jul 2025 80.6%
- 5 LFM2.5-2.6B 80.1%
- 6 LFM2.5-8B-A1B 79.9%
- 7
Qwen3-VL-235B-A22B 79.1%
- 8
Qwen3-Next-80B-A3B 77.8%
- 9
ERNIE-4.5-300B-A47B 76.6%
- 10
Qwen3-14B 74.8%
- 11
Apertus 70B 74.7%
- 12
EXAONE 4.0 32B 73.5%
- 13
Qwen3-32B 73%
- 14
Qwen3-30B-A3B 72.2%
- 15
Qwen3-235B-A22B 71.9%
- 16
Qwen3-8B 71.2%
- 17 LFM2.5-1.2B-Thinking 69.3%
- 18 GPT-4.1 mini 67%
- 19
Qwen3-4B 66.3%
- 20
Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B 64%
- 21
ERNIE-4.5-21B-A3B-Thinking 63.3%
- 22 LFM2.5-1.2B-Instruct 61%
- 23 LFM2.5-VL-3B 59.4%
- 24 LFM2-8B-A1B 58.2%
- 25 GPT-4.1 nano 57.2%
- 26
Qwen3-1.7B 51.2%
- 27 LFM2-1.2B 45.3%
- 28
North Micro Vision Instruct 37.3%
| # | Model | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | LFM3-1.7B | 89.1% | Oct 2026 | Model card | |
| 2 | | 85.6% | Feb 2026 | Model card | |
| 3 | LFM2.5-24B-A2B | 84.4% | Oct 2026 | Model card | |
| 4 | | 80.6% | Jul 2025 | Model card | |
| 5 | LFM2.5-2.6B | 80.1% | Aug 2026 | Model card | |
| 6 | LFM2.5-8B-A1B | 79.9% | May 2026 | Model card | |
| 7 | | 79.1% | Sep 2025 | Model card | |
| 8 | | 77.8% | Sep 2025 | Model card | |
| 9 | | 76.6% | Jun 2025 | Model card | |
| 10 | | 74.8% | May 2025 | Model card | |
| 11 | | 74.7% | Sep 2025 | Model card | |
| 12 | | 73.5% | Jul 2025 | Model card | |
| 13 | | 73% | May 2025 | Model card | |
| 14 | | 72.2% | May 2025 | Model card | |
| 15 | | 71.9% | Apr 2025 | Model card | |
| 16 | | 71.2% | May 2025 | Model card | |
| 17 | LFM2.5-1.2B-Thinking | 69.3% | Jan 2026 | Model card | |
| 18 | GPT-4.1 mini | 67% | Apr 2025 | Model card | |
| 19 | | 66.3% | May 2025 | Model card | |
| 20 | | 64% | Sep 2025 | Model card | |
| 21 | | 63.3% | Sep 2025 | Model card | |
| 22 | LFM2.5-1.2B-Instruct | 61% | Jan 2026 | Model card | |
| 23 | LFM2.5-VL-3B | 59.4% | Aug 2026 | Model card | |
| 24 | LFM2-8B-A1B | 58.2% | Oct 2025 | Model card | |
| 25 | GPT-4.1 nano | 57.2% | Apr 2025 | Model card | |
| 26 | | 51.2% | May 2025 | Model card | |
| 27 | LFM2-1.2B | 45.3% | Nov 2025 | Model card | |
| 28 | | 37.3% | Aug 2026 | Model card |
7 models have held number one since its release in Oct 2024
Lab claims count from the day the card came out, independent runs from the model’s release.
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.
2 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.
| Date | Launch post | Score | As the post writes it |
|---|---|---|---|
| 27 Oct 2026 | LFM3-1.7B | 89.1 | Multi-IF |
| 13 Oct 2026 | LFM2.5-24B-A2B | 84.4 | Multi-IF |
| 12 Aug 2026 | LFM2.5-VL-3B | 59.4 | Multi-IF |
| 12 Aug 2026 | 37.3 | Multi-If | |
| 4 Aug 2026 | LFM2.5-2.6B | 80.1 | Multi-IF |
| 28 May 2026 | LFM2.5-8B-A1B | 79.9 | Multi-IF |
| 6 Feb 2026 | 85.6 | Multi-IF | |
| 20 Jan 2026 | LFM2.5-1.2B-Thinking | 69.3 | Multi-IF (± 0.09) |
| 5 Jan 2026 | LFM2.5-1.2B-Instruct | 61 | Multi-IF |
| 7 Oct 2025 | LFM2-8B-A1B | 58.2 | Multi-IF |
| 23 Sep 2025 | 79.1 | MultiIF | |
| 22 Sep 2025 | 64 | MultiIF | |
| 11 Sep 2025 | 77.8 | MultiIF | |
| 9 Sep 2025 | 63.3 | Multi-IF (Accuracy) | |
| 25 Jul 2025 | 80.6 | MultiIF | |
| 15 Jul 2025 | 73.5 | Multi-IF (EN) (reasoning) | |
| 30 Jun 2025 | 76.6 | Multi-IF | |
| 29 Apr 2025 | 71.9 | Multi-IF | |
| 14 Apr 2025 | GPT-4.1 nano | 57.2 | Multi-IF |
| 14 Apr 2025 | GPT-4.1 mini | 67 | Multi-IF |
15 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.
| Date | Document | Score | As the document writes it | Section |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4 Feb 2026 | | 85.6 | Multi-IF (Table 2) | Capabilities |
| 28 Nov 2025 | LFM2-8B-A1B technical report | 58.2 | Multi-IF, LFM2-8B-A1B (Table 7) | Capabilities |
| 28 Nov 2025 | LFM2-1.2B technical report | 45.3 | Multi-IF, LFM2-1.2B (Table 6) | Capabilities |
| 26 Nov 2025 | | 79.1 | MultiIF (Table 6) | Capabilities |
| 22 Sep 2025 | | 64 | MultiIF, Instruct (Table 4). Thinking 72.9 (Table 5) | Capabilities |
| 17 Sep 2025 | | 74.7 | Multi-IFEval (harness id multi-if), prompt-level loose, 8 languages (Table 19) | Capabilities |
| 15 Jul 2025 | | 73.5 | Multi-IF (EN), English subset (Table 3, Reasoning). Non-reasoning 71.6 (Table 4) | Capabilities |
| 29 Jun 2025 | | 76.6 | Multi-IF (Table 5) | Capabilities |
| 14 May 2025 | | 71.2 | Multi-IF, thinking mode (Table 17). Non-thinking 69.2 (Table 18) | Capabilities |
| 14 May 2025 | | 66.3 | Multi-IF, thinking mode (Table 17). Non-thinking 61.3 (Table 18) | Capabilities |
| 14 May 2025 | | 73 | Multi-IF, thinking mode (Table 13). Non-thinking 70.7 (Table 14) | Capabilities |
| 14 May 2025 | | 72.2 | Multi-IF, thinking mode (Table 15). Non-thinking 70.8 (Table 16) | Capabilities |
| 14 May 2025 | | 71.9 | Multi-IF, thinking mode (Table 11). Non-thinking 70.2 (Table 12) | Capabilities |
| 14 May 2025 | | 74.8 | Multi-IF, thinking mode (Table 15). Non-thinking 72.9 (Table 16) | Capabilities |
| 14 May 2025 | | 51.2 | Multi-IF, thinking mode (Table 19). Non-thinking 44.7 (Table 20) | Capabilities |
More 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%
- 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%
- NV Chat Benchmark In use Models answer chat prompts from an internal NVIDIA set. The Nemotron 3.5 Super VL card labels the score an LMArena v3 proxy.
Nemotron 3.5 Super VL 52.7