reasoning benchmark
PostTrainBench Lite measures whether an agent can design and execute a full post-training strategy (data, prompts, RL recipe, and eval loop) for a pretrained base model under a constrained time budget, scored as normalized mean reward over the improvement window.
Updated Aug 7, 2026
Sorted by the source-provided rank. Higher score is better according to the registry.
| 1 | OP | 51.5% | 100.0% | 3 | C | |
| 2 | OP | 50.3% | 50.0% | 3 | C | |
| 3 | OP | 29.6% | 0.0% | 3 | 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.
PostTrainBench Lite measures whether an agent can design and execute a full post-training strategy (data, prompts, RL recipe, and eval loop) for a pretrained base model under a constrained time budget, scored as normalized mean reward over the improvement window.
Scores are shown in ratio. 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 PostTrainBench Lite.
GPT-5.6 Terra is currently ranked first with 51.5%.
PostTrainBench Lite measures whether an agent can design and execute a full post-training strategy (data, prompts, RL recipe, and eval loop) for a pretrained base model under a constrained time budget, scored as normalized mean reward over the improvement window.
Yes. Higher values rank better for this benchmark.
3 unique published model results are currently shown.
This benchmark is preserved as source-native evidence but is not eligible for the current overall score.