Benchmark Almanac

NatureBench

Claude Opus 5 26.7% leads since Jul 2026 Not in model cards

Coding agents work on 90 tasks distilled from Nature-family papers, each in its own container, and try to match or beat the published results.

67 upvotes on Hugging Face papers and 137 GitHub stars.

In the authors’ words

We introduce NatureBench, a cross-discipline benchmark of 90 tasks distilled from peer-reviewed Nature-family publications, designed to evaluate whether AI coding agents can move beyond reproduction toward discovery on real scientific problems. NatureBench is built on NatureGym, an automated pipeline that constructs a standardized, per-task containerized environment from a source paper, addressing the environment-fragmentation problem that has limited the credibility of prior agent-on-research benchmarks. Evaluating ten frontier agent configurations under a strict web-search-disabled protocol, we find that the strongest model surpasses SOTA on only 17.8% of tasks under the g>0.1 criterion. Analysis of method pathways reveals that agents succeed primarily through methodological translation, converting scientific tasks into familiar supervised prediction problems, rather than through genuine scientific invention. Failures are dominated by wrong method choice and insufficient compute budget, not by task misunderstanding. We release the benchmark, the NatureGym pipeline, and a public leaderboard with maintainer-side reproduction. Code: https://github.com/FrontisAI/NatureBench

Abstract of NatureBench: Can Coding Agents Match the Published SOTA of Nature-Family Papers? (arXiv:2606.24530, CC0)
Made by Frontis AI Released Jun 2026 Research science All tasks public Last model added Sep 2026 Scores refreshed 2 Nov 2026
Level
Research frontier Researchers, on open problems or tasks that take days
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.
18
Models scored on its own leaderboard

Claude Opus 5 leads with 26.7% among models released by Sep 2026

Best score per model from the benchmark's own leaderboard, read on 2 Nov 2026. Where a model ran with several settings or harnesses, we keep its best.

The newest model with a score here came out in Sep 2026, and nobody has tested a newer one. Among the 20 highest-ranked models on the capability index, these have no score yet:

  1. 1 Claude Opus 5 26.7%
  2. 2 DeepSeek-V4-Pro 25.6%
  3. 3 Qwen3.8 Max (0902) 17.8%
  4. 4 Claude Opus 4.7 15.6%
  5. 5 Kimi K3 14.4%
  6. 6 GLM-5.2 13.3%
  7. 7 Gemini 3.5 Flash 12.2%
  8. 8 Claude Opus 4.6 11.1%
  9. 9 Qwen 3.8 Max 11.1%
  10. 10 GLM-5.3-Flash 11.1%
  11. 11 GLM-5.3 10%
  12. 12 Kimi K2.6 7.78%
  13. 13 Qwen3.7-Max 7.78%
  14. 14 GPT-5.4 6.67%
  15. 15 GLM-5.1 6.67%
  16. 16 MiniMax-M3 6.67%
  17. 17 GPT-5.5 4.44%
  18. 18 MiniMax-M2.7 1.11%
#ModelScoreSettingDateSource
1 Claude Opus 5 26.7% HELIX Jul 2026 Official leaderboard
2 DeepSeek-V4-Pro 25.6% Luria 1.0 Apr 2026 Official leaderboard
3 Qwen3.8 Max (0902) 17.8% Claude Code Sep 2026 Official leaderboard
4 Claude Opus 4.7 15.6% Claude Code Apr 2026 Official leaderboard
5 Kimi K3 14.4% Claude Code Jul 2026 Official leaderboard
6 GLM-5.2 13.3% Claude Code Jun 2026 Official leaderboard
7 Gemini 3.5 Flash 12.2% HELIX May 2026 Official leaderboard
8 Claude Opus 4.6 11.1% Claude Code Feb 2026 Official leaderboard
9 Qwen 3.8 Max 11.1% Claude Code Aug 2026 Official leaderboard
10 GLM-5.3-Flash 11.1% HELIX Aug 2026 Official leaderboard
11 GLM-5.3 10% Claude Code Aug 2026 Official leaderboard
12 Kimi K2.6 7.78% Claude Code Apr 2026 Official leaderboard
13 Qwen3.7-Max 7.78% Claude Code May 2026 Official leaderboard
14 GPT-5.4 6.67% Codex Mar 2026 Official leaderboard
15 GLM-5.1 6.67% Claude Code Apr 2026 Official leaderboard
16 MiniMax-M3 6.67% Claude Code Jun 2026 Official leaderboard
17 GPT-5.5 4.44% Codex Apr 2026 Official leaderboard
18 MiniMax-M2.7 1.11% Claude Code Mar 2026 Official leaderboard

2 models have held number one since its release in Jun 2026

Lab claims count from the day the card came out, independent runs from the model’s release.

DeepSeek Anthropic
Own leaderboard Not tested since Sep 2026

Scores over time

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 Best so far
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2026 Near the ceiling (85%) Claude Opus 5 DeepSeek-V4-Pro Claude Opus 4.7 Claude Opus 4.6 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2026 Near the ceiling (85%) Claude Opus 5 Claude Opus 4.7

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 Science and reasoning

All 88 in Science and reasoning
  • GPQA Diamond In use 198 graduate-level 'Google-proof' multiple-choice questions in biology, chemistry and physics. Gemini 4 Argon 96.4%
  • Terminal-Bench-Science In use 70 scientific research-workflow tasks across five science areas, run in Harbor containers. Hidden tests give the resolution rate. GPT-6 Astra 68.1%
  • FrontierScience In use Models solve physics, chemistry, and biology problems in an Olympiad track graded by short answer and a Research track graded by 10-point rubrics. Intern-S2-397B 87%
  • BioMysteryBench In use Bioinformatics problems on anonymized real datasets that require real analysis with tools. Rubric-graded, with human-solvable and human-difficult splits. Claude Opus 5 90.1%
  • HiPhO In use Models solve theory problems from 2024 and 2025 physics olympiad exams, some with diagrams. Official marking schemes grade answers and steps, mapped to medal levels. Gemini 3 Pro 78.3%
  • LABBench2 In use 11 biology research sub-tasks (literature, figures, tables, patents, trials and more) with tool access. Macro-averaged accuracy. GPT-5.2 60.9%