StructEval
Models generate or convert structured outputs in 18 formats, such as JSON, TOML and HTML. StructEval-T covers text-only formats and StructEval-V renderable ones.
2,035 examples over 44 task types. Published in TMLR in January 2026.
In the authors’ words
As Large Language Models (LLMs) become integral to software development workflows, their ability to generate structured outputs has become critically important. We introduce StructEval, a comprehensive benchmark for evaluating LLMs' capabilities in producing both non-renderable (JSON, YAML, CSV) and renderable (HTML, React, SVG) structured formats. Unlike prior benchmarks, StructEval systematically evaluates structural fidelity across diverse formats through two paradigms: 1) generation tasks, producing structured output from natural language prompts, and 2) conversion tasks, translating between structured formats. Our benchmark encompasses 18 formats and 44 types of task, with novel metrics for format adherence and structural correctness. Results reveal significant performance gaps-even state-of-the-art models like o1-mini achieve only 75.58 average score, with open-source alternatives lagging approximately 10 points behind. We find generation tasks more challenging than conversion tasks, and producing correct visual content more difficult than generating text-only structures.
- 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
- Code A program or patch run against tests.
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite leads with 81.2%
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.
- 81.2
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite
- 80.6
Gemini 3.8 Flash
- 79.6 MiMo-V2.6 Flash
- 78.3
DeepSeek-V4-Flash
- 77.5
Gemma 4 31B IT
- 77.3 Kimi K2.5
- 77.2
DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus
- 76.9
Tencent Hy3
- 76.8
Qwen3.7-Plus
- 76.2 GLM-5.3-Flash
- 76.1 GPT-4.1 mini
- 76.0 GPT-4o
- 75.6 o1-mini
- 75.5
DeepSeek-V3.2
- 74.3
Nemotron 3 Ultra
- 73.2 GPT-4o mini
- 73.0 Qwen3.5 9B (Ollama)
- 72.5
Mistral Small 4
- 72.0
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
- 71.8
Gemini 1.5 Pro
- 71.6
Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct
- 69.8 GPT-5.4 Nano
- 68.9
Gemma 4 26B A4B
- 67.5 Qwen3 8B (Ollama)
- 67.3 Gemma 2 9B (Ollama)
- 67.0
Qwen3-4B
- 62.5
Gemini 2.0 Flash
- 61.8
Llama 3.1-8B
- 57.0
Phi-4 Mini
- 57.0 Gemma3 4B (Ollama)
- 53.1 Qwen2.5 7B Instruct (Ollama)
- 51.6
Llama 3-8B
- 40.8
Phi-3-mini-128k-instruct
- 1
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite 81.2%
- 2
Gemini 3.8 Flash 80.6%
- 3 MiMo-V2.6 Flash 79.6%
- 4
DeepSeek-V4-Flash 78.3%
- 5
Gemma 4 31B IT 77.5%
- 6 Kimi K2.5 77.3%
- 7
DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus 77.2%
- 8
Tencent Hy3 76.9%
- 9
Qwen3.7-Plus 76.8%
- 10 GLM-5.3-Flash 76.2%
- 11 GPT-4.1 mini 76.1%
- 12 GPT-4o May 2024 76%
- 13 o1-mini 75.6%
- 14
DeepSeek-V3.2 75.5%
- 15
Nemotron 3 Ultra 74.3%
- 16 GPT-4o mini 73.2%
- 17 Qwen3.5 9B (Ollama) 73%
- 18
Mistral Small 4 72.5%
- 19
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite Jun 2025 72%
- 20
Gemini 1.5 Pro Feb 2024 71.8%
- 21
Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct Jul 2025 71.6%
- 22 GPT-5.4 Nano 69.8%
- 23
Gemma 4 26B A4B 68.9%
- 24 Qwen3 8B (Ollama) 67.5%
- 25 Gemma 2 9B (Ollama) 67.3%
- 26
Qwen3-4B 67%
- 27
Gemini 2.0 Flash Feb 2025 62.5%
- 28
Llama 3.1-8B 61.8%
- 29
Phi-4 Mini 57%
- 30 Gemma3 4B (Ollama) 57%
- 31 Qwen2.5 7B Instruct (Ollama) 53.1%
- 32
Llama 3-8B 51.6%
- 33
Phi-3-mini-128k-instruct 40.8%
| # | Entry | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | | 81.2% | Mar 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 2 | | 80.6% | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 3 | MiMo-V2.6 Flash | 79.6% | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 4 | | 78.3% | Apr 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 5 | | 77.5% | Apr 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 6 | Kimi K2.5 | 77.3% | Jan 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 7 | | 77.2% | Sep 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 8 | | 76.9% | Jul 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 9 | | 76.8% | Jun 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 10 | GLM-5.3-Flash | 76.2% | Aug 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 11 | GPT-4.1 mini | 76.1% | Apr 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 12 | GPT-4o May 2024 | 76% | May 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 13 | o1-mini | 75.6% | Sep 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 14 | | 75.5% | Dec 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 15 | | 74.3% | Jun 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 16 | GPT-4o mini | 73.2% | Jul 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 17 | Qwen3.5 9B (Ollama) | 73% | Mar 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 18 | | 72.5% | Mar 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 19 | | 72% | Jun 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 20 | | 71.8% | Feb 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 21 | | 71.6% | Jul 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 22 | GPT-5.4 Nano | 69.8% | Mar 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 23 | | 68.9% | Apr 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 24 | Qwen3 8B (Ollama) | 67.5% | Apr 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 25 | Gemma 2 9B (Ollama) | 67.3% | Jun 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 26 | | 67% | Apr 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 27 | | 62.5% | Feb 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 28 | | 61.8% | Jul 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 29 | | 57% | Feb 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 30 | Gemma3 4B (Ollama) | 57% | Mar 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 31 | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct (Ollama) | 53.1% | Sep 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 32 | | 51.6% | Apr 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 33 | | 40.8% | Apr 2024 | Official leaderboard |
Labs report scores for 1 model in their cards. We plot every source in the charts below.
4 models have held number one since its release in May 2025
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.
One lab 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 23 Oct 2026 | 80 | StructEval-T |
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.
| Date | Document | Score | As the document writes it | Section |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 23 Oct 2026 | | 80 | StructEval-T, released Q4_K_M imatrix checkpoint (Table 5). BF16 80.4 (Table 3) | Capabilities |
More in Coding
- SWE-bench Verified In use 500 human-validated GitHub issues from 12 Python repos. Agent writes a patch that must pass hidden tests. Claude Opus 4.7 83.5%
- SWE-bench Multilingual In use 300 GitHub-issue tasks across nine programming languages in SWE-bench format. Patch graded by repository tests. Claude Opus 5.5 93.9%
- LiveCodeBench v6 In use Competitive programming problems collected after model cutoffs from LeetCode, AtCoder, Codeforces. Scored pass@1 on hidden tests.
DeepSeek-V4-Pro 93.5%
- DeepSWE In use 113 original long-horizon engineering tasks across 91 repos and five languages, written from scratch. Hand-written verifiers accept alternative solutions. GPT-6 Astra 74.1%
- SciCode In use Scientist-curated research coding problems split into subproblems across natural sciences. Code checked against test cases.
Seed2.1 Pro 59.8%
- Codeforces rating In use Model solves recent Codeforces contest problems. An Elo-style rating is computed from simulated contest performance.
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 3,471