reasoning benchmark
A rigorous code synthesis evaluation framework that augments existing datasets with extensive test cases generated by LLM and mutation-based strategies to better assess functional correctness of generated code, including HumanEval+ with 80x more test cases
Updated Aug 7, 2026
Sorted by the source-provided rank. Higher score is better according to the registry.
| 1 | MA | 0.803 points | 100.0% | 4 | C | |
| 2 | AC | 0.79 points | 66.7% | 4 | C | |
| 3 | AC | 0.776 points | 33.3% | 4 | C | |
| 4 | AC | 0.703 points | 0.0% | 4 | C |
Top published rows on the benchmark's original scale.
The top published results on this benchmark's own scale.
Definition and scoring fields from the benchmark registry.
A rigorous code synthesis evaluation framework that augments existing datasets with extensive test cases generated by LLM and mutation-based strategies to better assess functional correctness of generated code, including HumanEval+ with 80x more test cases
Scores are shown in points. The current registry marks this benchmark as not independently verified with evidence level B.
Source-native results are preserved. Eligibility for the overall LLMBoard score is a separate policy decision.
Common questions about EvalPlus.
Kimi K2 Base is currently ranked first with 0.803 points.
A rigorous code synthesis evaluation framework that augments existing datasets with extensive test cases generated by LLM and mutation-based strategies to better assess functional correctness of generated code, including HumanEval+ with 80x more test cases
Yes. Higher values rank better for this benchmark.
4 unique published model results are currently shown.
This benchmark is preserved as source-native evidence but is not eligible for the current overall score.