Benchmark Almanac

ProofBench

Claude Opus 5 78% leads since Jul 2026 Not in model cards

Models write Lean 4 proofs of graduate-level theorems, with Mathlib search and code tools for up to 40 turns. Scored by the share that compile.

Vals froze the v1 board on 2026-08-05 with Claude Opus 5 on top at 78%. ProofBench v1.1 replaced it on 2026-08-13 with non-comparable scores.

In the authors’ words

We present FormalProofBench, a private benchmark designed to evaluate whether AI models can produce formally verified mathematical proofs at the graduate level. Each task pairs a natural-language problem with a Lean 4 formal statement, and a model must output a Lean proof accepted by the Lean 4 checker. FormalProofBench targets advanced undergraduate and graduate mathematics, with problems drawn from qualifying exams and standard textbooks across topics including analysis, algebra, probability, and logic. We evaluate a range of frontier models with an agentic harness, and find that the best-performing foundation model achieves 33.5% accuracy, with performance dropping rapidly after that. In addition to the accuracy numbers, we also provide empirical analysis of tool-use, failure modes, cost and latency, thereby providing a thorough evaluation of the formal-theorem proving abilities of frontier models.

Abstract of FormalProofBench: Can Models Write Graduate Level Math Proofs That Are Formally Verified? (arXiv:2603.26996, CC0)
Made by Vals AI Released Jan 2026 Formal proofs Public tasks plus a private test set 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
Written proof
60
Entries on its own leaderboard, 59 models we track

Claude Opus 5 leads with 78% among models released by Aug 2026

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. Every run is in the next chart. Names in gray aren't in our model list: fine-tunes, agent systems, products and older models. They don't count toward leaders.

The newest model with a score here came out in Aug 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 78%
  2. 2 Claude Fable 5 77%
  3. 3 GPT-5.6 Sol 77%
  4. 4 Aristotle 71%
  5. 5 GPT-5.6 Terra 71%
  6. 6 Kimi K3 70%
  7. 7 Claude Opus 4.8 69%
  8. 8 Claude Sonnet 5 66%
  9. 9 Muse Spark 1.2 57%
  10. 10 GPT-5.4 xhigh 56%
  11. 11 Claude Opus 4.7 54%
  12. 12 GPT-5.6 Luna 54%
  13. 13 Claude Opus 4.6 thinking 50%
  14. 14 GPT-5.5 50%
  15. 15 DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 49%
  16. 16 Qwen 3.8 Max 47%
  17. 17 Claude Sonnet 4.6 45%
  18. 18 Grok 4.6 45%
  19. 19 Muse Spark 1.1 39%
  20. 20 DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 39%
  21. 21 Claude Opus 4.5 thinking 36%
  22. 22 Gemini 3.6 Flash 36%
  23. 23 GLM-5.2 35%
  24. 24 Grok 4.5 30%
  25. 25 Gemini 3.5 Flash 29%
  26. 26 Gemini 3.1 Pro 26%
  27. 27 Qwen3.7-Max 26%
  28. 28 MiMo-V2.5-Pro 24%
  29. 29 GLM-5.1 22.2%
  30. 30 GPT-5.4 Mini 21%
  31. 31 Gemini 3 Pro 20%
  32. 32 Claude Sonnet 4.5 thinking 19%
  33. 33 MiniMax-M3 19%
  34. 34 GPT-5 18%
  35. 35 Muse Spark 17%
  36. 36 Kimi K2.6 16%
  37. 37 MiMo-V2.5 16%
  38. 38 GPT-5.2 15%
  39. 39 Gemini 3 Flash 15%
  40. 40 Grok 4.20 14%
  41. 41 Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite 13%
  42. 42 GPT-5 nano 12%
  43. 43 Grok 4.3 11%
  44. 44 DeepSeek-V4-Pro 10%
  45. 45 Mistral Medium 3.5 10%
  46. 46 GPT-5 mini 9.00%
  47. 47 GPT-5.1-Codex-Max 9.00%
  48. 48 DeepSeek-V3.2 non-thinking 8.00%
  49. 49 Qwen3.6 27B 8.00%
  50. 50 GLM-4.7 6.00%
  51. 51 Ling-3.0-flash 6.00%
  52. 52 GPT-5.4 Nano 5.00%
  53. 53 Inkling-Small 5.00%
  54. 54 Grok 4.1 Fast 4.00%
  55. 55 MiniMax-M2.5 4.00%
  56. 56 MiniMax-M2.7 3.00%
  57. 57 Nemotron 3 Ultra 2.00%
  58. 58 Inkling 2.00%
  59. 59 Laguna M.1 0%
  60. 60 Laguna XS.2 0%
#EntryScoreSettingDateSource
1 Claude Opus 5 78% Jul 2026 Official leaderboard
2 Claude Fable 5 77% Jun 2026 Official leaderboard
3 GPT-5.6 Sol 77% Jul 2026 Official leaderboard
4 Aristotle 71% Official leaderboard
5 GPT-5.6 Terra 71% Jul 2026 Official leaderboard
6 Kimi K3 70% Jul 2026 Official leaderboard
7 Claude Opus 4.8 69% May 2026 Official leaderboard
8 Claude Sonnet 5 66% Jun 2026 Official leaderboard
9 Muse Spark 1.2 57% Aug 2026 Official leaderboard
10 GPT-5.4 56% xhigh Mar 2026 Official leaderboard
11 Claude Opus 4.7 54% Apr 2026 Official leaderboard
12 GPT-5.6 Luna 54% Jul 2026 Official leaderboard
13 Claude Opus 4.6 50% thinking Feb 2026 Official leaderboard
14 GPT-5.5 50% Apr 2026 Official leaderboard
15 DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 49% Aug 2026 Official leaderboard
16 Qwen 3.8 Max 47% Aug 2026 Official leaderboard
17 Claude Sonnet 4.6 45% Feb 2026 Official leaderboard
18 Grok 4.6 45% Aug 2026 Official leaderboard
19 Muse Spark 1.1 39% Jul 2026 Official leaderboard
20 DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 39% Jul 2026 Official leaderboard
21 Claude Opus 4.5 36% thinking Nov 2025 Official leaderboard
22 Gemini 3.6 Flash 36% Jul 2026 Official leaderboard
23 GLM-5.2 35% Jun 2026 Official leaderboard
24 Grok 4.5 30% Jul 2026 Official leaderboard
25 Gemini 3.5 Flash 29% May 2026 Official leaderboard
26 Gemini 3.1 Pro 26% Feb 2026 Official leaderboard
27 Qwen3.7-Max 26% May 2026 Official leaderboard
28 MiMo-V2.5-Pro 24% Apr 2026 Official leaderboard
29 GLM-5.1 22.2% Apr 2026 Official leaderboard
30 GPT-5.4 Mini 21% Mar 2026 Official leaderboard
31 Gemini 3 Pro 20% Nov 2025 Official leaderboard
32 Claude Sonnet 4.5 19% thinking Sep 2025 Official leaderboard
33 MiniMax-M3 19% Jun 2026 Official leaderboard
34 GPT-5 18% Aug 2025 Official leaderboard
35 Muse Spark 17% Apr 2026 Official leaderboard
36 Kimi K2.6 16% Apr 2026 Official leaderboard
37 MiMo-V2.5 16% Apr 2026 Official leaderboard
38 GPT-5.2 15% Dec 2025 Official leaderboard
39 Gemini 3 Flash 15% Dec 2025 Official leaderboard
40 Grok 4.20 14% Feb 2026 Official leaderboard
41 Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite 13% Jul 2026 Official leaderboard
42 GPT-5 nano 12% Aug 2025 Official leaderboard
43 Grok 4.3 11% Apr 2026 Official leaderboard
44 DeepSeek-V4-Pro 10% Apr 2026 Official leaderboard
45 Mistral Medium 3.5 10% Apr 2026 Official leaderboard
46 GPT-5 mini 9.00% Aug 2025 Official leaderboard
47 GPT-5.1-Codex-Max 9.00% Nov 2025 Official leaderboard
48 DeepSeek-V3.2 8.00% non-thinking Dec 2025 Official leaderboard
49 Qwen3.6 27B 8.00% Apr 2026 Official leaderboard
50 GLM-4.7 6.00% Dec 2025 Official leaderboard
51 Ling-3.0-flash 6.00% Aug 2026 Official leaderboard
52 GPT-5.4 Nano 5.00% Mar 2026 Official leaderboard
53 Inkling-Small 5.00% Jul 2026 Official leaderboard
54 Grok 4.1 Fast 4.00% Nov 2025 Official leaderboard
55 MiniMax-M2.5 4.00% Feb 2026 Official leaderboard
56 MiniMax-M2.7 3.00% Mar 2026 Official leaderboard
57 Nemotron 3 Ultra 2.00% Jun 2026 Official leaderboard
58 Inkling 2.00% Jul 2026 Official leaderboard
59 Laguna M.1 0% Apr 2026 Official leaderboard
60 Laguna XS.2 0% Apr 2026 Official leaderboard

Epoch AI has scores for 83 models. We plot every source in the charts below.

The best score, 78%, costs $2.11 a task

Runs on the cost frontier score higher than any run that's cheaper. The costs are the leaderboard's own estimates, so compare them only within this benchmark.

OpenAI Anthropic DeepSeek Meta Cost frontier One model at each effort level
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% $0.01 $0.10 $1.00 $10 Cost per task, log scale Claude Opus 5 GPT-5.6 Terra Muse Spark 1.2 GPT-5.6 Luna DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 GPT-5.4 Nano 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% $0.01 $0.10 $1.00 $10 Cost per task, log scale Claude Opus 5 GPT-5.6 Terra
ModelEffortHarnessScoreCost per taskOutput tokens
Claude Opus 5 78% $2.11
Claude Fable 5 77% $5.45
GPT-5.6 Sol 77% $1.74
GPT-5.6 Terra 71% $0.94
Kimi K3 70% $1.67
Claude Opus 4.8 69% $2.29
Claude Sonnet 5 66% $2.25
Muse Spark 1.2 57% $0.54
GPT-5.4 xhigh 56% $3.20
Claude Opus 4.7 54% $1.81
GPT-5.6 Luna 54% $0.09
Claude Opus 4.6 thinking 50% $2.70
GPT-5.5 50% $1.68
DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 49% $0.07
Qwen 3.8 Max 47% $1.58
Claude Sonnet 4.6 45% $2.16
Grok 4.6 45% $0.76
Muse Spark 1.1 39% $0.52
DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 39% $0.03
Claude Opus 4.5 thinking 36% $1.27
Gemini 3.6 Flash 36% $0.52
GLM-5.2 35%
Grok 4.5 30% $0.48
Gemini 3.5 Flash 29% $1.40
Gemini 3.1 Pro 26% $0.53
Qwen3.7-Max 26% $2.46
MiMo-V2.5-Pro 24% $0.07
GLM-5.1 22.2% $0.58
GPT-5.4 Mini 21% $0.25
Gemini 3 Pro 20% $1.23
Claude Sonnet 4.5 thinking 19% $0.65
MiniMax-M3 19% $0.37
GPT-5 18% $0.85
Muse Spark 17%
Kimi K2.6 16% $0.30
MiMo-V2.5 16% $0.07
GPT-5.2 15% $1.06
Gemini 3 Flash 15% $0.33
Grok 4.20 14% $0.32
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite 13% $0.13
GPT-5 nano 12% $0.05
Grok 4.3 11% $0.24
DeepSeek-V4-Pro 10%
Mistral Medium 3.5 10% $1.50
GPT-5 mini 9.00% $0.22
GPT-5.1-Codex-Max 9.00% $0.53
DeepSeek-V3.2 non-thinking 8.00% $0.12
Qwen3.6 27B 8.00% $0.51
GLM-4.7 6.00% $0.14
Ling-3.0-flash 6.00% $0.04
GPT-5.4 Nano 5.00% $0.02
Inkling-Small 5.00% $0.08
Grok 4.1 Fast 4.00% $0.10
DeepSeek-V3.2 thinking 4.00% $0.13
MiniMax-M2.5 4.00% $0.06
MiniMax-M2.7 3.00% $0.04
Nemotron 3 Ultra 2.00%
Inkling 2.00% $0.20
Laguna M.1 0%
Laguna XS.2 0%

6 models have held number one since its release in Jan 2026

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 Epoch AI’s runs.

Anthropic OpenAI
Own leaderboard Replaced by v1.1, Aug 2026
Epoch AI runs Passed 85% in Jun 2026, by Claude Fable 5

The best score passed 85% in Jun 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 Run or collected by Epoch AI Best so far
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2026 2027 Near the ceiling (85%) Claude Fable 5.1 Claude Fable 5 Claude Opus 4.8 GPT-5.4 Claude Opus 4.6 Claude Opus 4.5 Gemini 3 Pro 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2026 2027 Near the ceiling (85%) Claude Fable 5.1 Claude Opus 4.8

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.

Versions

We switch the top row to each new version when it comes out. Open it for one row per version. An old version stays in play while people still test it, so whoever first takes it past 85% gets credit for closing it out.

Anthropic OpenAI
ProofBench v1.1 Passed 85% in Aug 2026, by Claude Opus 5
ProofBench Passed 85% in Jun 2026, by Claude Fable 5
ProofBench v1.1 Passed 85% in Aug 2026, by Claude Opus 5

More in Math

All 105 in Math
  • IMO-AnswerBench In use 400 olympiad problems with short verifiable answers, robustified against memorization. Scored by answer match. GLM-5.2 91%
  • AIME 2026 In use Models solve the 30 integer-answer problems from the 2026 AIME I and II math competitions. Scored by exact answer match. GPT-5.5 100%
  • HMMT 2026 In use Models solve the 33 final-answer problems from the February 2026 Harvard-MIT Mathematics Tournament. Scored by exact answer match. GPT-5.5 98.5%
  • MathArena (Apex, IMO, USAMO) In use Evaluates models on newly released math competitions after release. Final-answer or human/LLM-judged proof scores. Claude Opus 4.8 81.3%
  • PolyMath In use Models solve 9,000 parallel math problems in 18 languages across four difficulty levels, from school math to frontier math. Final answers are checked. Qwen3.7-Max 86.5%
  • USAMO 2026 In use Models write full proofs for the six problems of the 2026 USA Mathematical Olympiad. Judges grade each proof from 0 to 7 against rubrics. GPT-5.5 98.2%