Welcome to Inspect Evals, a repository of community contributed LLM evaluations for Inspect AI. Inspect Evals was created in collaboration by the UK AISI, Arcadia Impact, and the Vector Institute.
[!IMPORTANT]
We’re updating our system for submitting and sharing evals. From 8th May 2026 onwards, community contributions will move to the /register/ folder, which means:
> - Submission requires opening a GitHub issue with your arXiv URL and source code link.
- A bot validates your submission, derives eval metadata, and opens a PR on your behalf.
- Inspect Evals points to your code repository, sharing it via the Inspect Evals documentation.
> We have outlined further details in EVAL_REGISTER.md and are open to feedback and questions! Please reach out through the Google Form.
Quick Start
- Fix or update an existing eval in inspect_evals/src: Community contributions are welcome and encouraged! Please see the Contributor Guide for further details.
- Run an existing eval: To run an eval listed on the Inspect Evals Docs, please navigate to the
Usagesection of its page. - Add (or update) an eval to the Inspect Evals Register: Please follow the Register Submission Guide to add a listing pointing to the repo containing the eval implementation.
- Build and share a new eval: This eval implementation template is a great starting point to help developers create evaluations using the Inspect AI framework. Then, follow the Register Submission Guide to add a listing to the Inspect Evals register.
This repository is maintained by the Inspect Evals maintainers.
Getting Started
The recommended version of Python for Inspect Evals is 3.11 or 3.12. You should be able to run all evals on these versions and also develop the codebase without any issues. You can install and pin a specific Python version by running:
uv python pin 3.11
As for Python 3.13, you should be able to run all evals except sciknoweval (its dependency is gensim which currently does not support 3.13+). Development should work under 3.13, however it's relatively untested — if you run into issues, let us know.
When it comes Python 3.14, at the time of writing this, many packages have yet to release versions for 3.14, so it's unsupported. The major one used by some Inspect Evals is torch. If you find running uv sync succeeding on 3.14, let us know and we'll remove this paragraph.
Below, you can see a workflow for a typical eval. Some of the evaluations require additional dependencies or installation steps. If your eval needs extra dependencies, instructions for installing in the README file in the eval's subdirectory.
Usage
Installation
There are two ways of using Inspect Evals, from pypi as a dependency of your own project and as a standalone checked out GitHub repository.
If you are using it from pypi, install the package and its dependencies via:
pip install inspect-evals
If you are using Inspect Evals in its repository, start by installing the necessary dependencies with:
uv sync
Running evaluations
Now you can start evaluating models. For simplicity's sake, this section assumes you are using Inspect Evals from the standalone repo. If that's not the case and you are not using uv to manage dependencies in your own project, you can use the same commands with uv run dropped.
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/arc_easy --model openai/gpt-5-nano
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/arc_challenge --model openai/gpt-5-nano
To run multiple tasks simultaneously use inspect eval-set:
uv run inspect eval-set inspect_evals/arc_easy inspect_evals/arc_challenge
You can also import tasks as normal Python objects and run them from python:
from inspect_ai import eval, eval_set
from inspect_evals.arc import arc_easy, arc_challenge
eval(arc_easy)
eval_set([arc_easy, arc_challenge], log_dir='logs-run-42')
After running evaluations, you can view their logs using the inspect view command:
uv run inspect view
For VS Code, you can also download Inspect AI extension for viewing logs.
If you don't want to specify the --model each time you run an evaluation, create a .env configuration file in your working directory that defines the INSPECT_EVAL_MODEL environment variable along with your API key. For example:
INSPECT_EVAL_MODEL=anthropic/claude-opus-4-1-20250805
ANTHROPIC_API_KEY=<anthropic-api-key>
Inspect supports many model providers including OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, Mistral, Azure AI, AWS Bedrock, Together AI, Groq, Hugging Face, vLLM, Ollama, and more. See the Model Providers documentation for additional details.
You might also be able to use a newer version of pip (25.1+) to install the project via pip install --group dev . or pip install --group dev '.[swe_bench]'. However this is not officially supported.
Documentation
For details on building the documentation, see the documentation guide.
For information on running tests and CI toggles, see the Technical Contribution Guide in CONTRIBUTING.md.
Hardware recommendations
Disk
We recommend having at least 35 GB of free disk space for Inspect Evals: the full installation takes about 10 GB and you'll also need some space for uv cache and datasets cache (most are small, but some take 13 GB such as MMIU).
Running some evals (e.g., CyBench, GDM capabilities evals) may require extra space beyond this because they pull Docker images. We recommend having at least 65 GB of extra space for running evals that have Dockerfiles in their file tree (though you might get away with less space) on top of the 35 GB suggestion above.
In total, you should be comfortable running evals with 100 GB of free space. If you end up running of out space while having 100+ GB of free space available, please let us know — this might be a bug.
Cache location
Datasets and other large assets are cached under the platform cache directory (~/.cache/inspect_evals on Linux, ~/Library/Caches/inspect_evals on macOS). Set INSPECT_EVALS_CACHE_DIR to put them somewhere else:
export INSPECT_EVALS_CACHE_DIR=/data/inspect-evals-cache
Use it when the default location is not writable (read-only container filesystems, images without a writable HOME), when the cache should live on a larger volume, or to stage assets for a machine with no network access: populate the directory on a connected machine running the same Inspect Evals version, copy it across, and point the variable at it there.
The variable is read when inspect_evals is first imported, so set it in the shell or in a .env file rather than from within Python.
For the same reason it must be an absolute path, or start with ~ for a path under your home directory. A relative path is rejected, because it would point somewhere different depending on where the eval was started from.
RAM
The amount of memory needed for an eval varies significantly with the eval. You'll be able to run most evals with only 0.5 GB of free RAM. However, some evals with larger datasets require 2-3 GB or more. And some evals that use Docker (e.g., some GDM capabilities evals) require up to 32 GB of RAM.
Harbor Framework Evaluations
For running evaluations from the Harbor Framework (e.g. Terminal-Bench 2.0, SWE-Bench Pro), use the Inspect Harbor package, which provides an interface to run Harbor tasks using Inspect AI.
List of Evals
Coding
APPS is a dataset for evaluating model performance on Python programming tasks across three difficulty levels consisting of 1,000 at introductory, 3,000 at interview, and 1,000 at competition level. The dataset consists of an additional 5,000 training samples, for a total of 10,000 total samples. We evaluate on questions from the test split, which consists of programming problems commonly found in coding interviews. Contributed by: @camticeuv run inspect eval inspect_evals/apps
A benchmark designed to evaluate LLMs as Agents Contributed by: @Felhof, @hannagabor, @shaheenahmedc
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/agent_bench_os
Python coding benchmark with 1,140 diverse questions drawing on numerous python libraries. Contributed by: @tim-hua-01
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/bigcodebench
- ### CORE-Bench
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/core_bench
Evaluates LLMs on class-level code generation with 100 tasks constructed over 500 person-hours. The study shows that LLMs perform worse on class-level tasks compared to method-level tasks. Contributed by: @zhenningdavidliu
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/class_eval
Evaluates LLM capability to generate correct CUDA code for kernel implementation, memory management, and parallel algorithm optimization tasks. Contributed by: @Vitamoon
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/compute_eval
Code generation benchmark with a thousand data science problems spanning seven Python libraries. Contributed by: @bienehito
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/ds1000
238 open-ended computer science problems spanning algorithmic (172) and research (66) tracks. Problems feature continuous partial scoring, with algorithmic solutions evaluated via compilation and test-case checking, and research solutions evaluated via custom evaluator scripts. Current frontier models score well below human expert baselines, making this a challenging, unsaturated benchmark. Contributed by: @JayBaileyCS
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/frontier_cs
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/frontier_cs_algorithmic
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/frontier_cs_research
Assesses how accurately language models can write correct Python functions based solely on natural-language instructions provided as docstrings. Contributed by: @adil-a
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/humaneval
Evaluates code generation models on their ability to produce correct code while adhering to specific instruction constraints across 8 programming languages. Contributed by: @PranshuSrivastava
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/ifevalcode
A benchmark for evaluating the ability of LLMs to write efficient GPU kernels. Contributed by: @jiito
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/kernelbench
Evaluates LLMs on competitive programming problems using a specialized Docker sandbox (LightCPVerifier) to execute and judge C++ code submissions against hidden test cases with time and memory constraints. Contributed by: @gjoshi2424
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/livecodebench_pro
Measures the ability of language models to generate short Python programs from simple natural-language descriptions, testing basic coding proficiency. Contributed by: @jddantes
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/mbpp
Machine learning tasks drawn from 75 Kaggle competitions. Contributed by: @samm393
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/mle_bench
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/mle_bench_full
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/mle_bench_lite
This benchmark evaluates LLM-based research agents on their ability to propose and implement novel methods using tasks from recent ML conference competitions, assessing both novelty and effectiveness compared to a baseline and top human solutions. Contributed by: @dmn-sjk
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/mlrc_bench
Agents are evaluated on their ability to replicate 20 ICML 2024 Spotlight and Oral papers from scratch. Given a research paper PDF, an addendum with clarifications, and a rubric defining evaluation criteria, the agent must reproduce the paper's key results by writing and executing code.
> Note: This eval is a work in progress. See
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/paperbench
A benchmark of freelance software engineering tasks from Upwork, valued at $1 million USD total in realworld payouts. Contributed by: @NelsonG-C, @MattFisher
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/swe_lancer
Evaluates AI's ability to resolve genuine software engineering issues sourced from 12 popular Python GitHub repositories, reflecting realistic coding and debugging scenarios. Contributed by: @max-kaufmann
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/swe_bench
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/swe_bench_verified_mini
SciCode tests the ability of language models to generate code to solve scientific research problems. It assesses models on 65 problems from mathematics, physics, chemistry, biology, and materials science. Contributed by: @xantheocracy
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/scicode
Evaluates language model performance on difficult Olympiad programming problems across four difficulty levels. Contributed by: @danwilhelm
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/usaco
Evaluates whether models can solve practical single-cell RNA-seq analysis tasks with deterministic grading. Tasks require empirical interaction with .h5ad data files — agents must load and analyze the data to produce correct answers. Covers 30 canonical tasks across 5 sequencing platforms and 7 task categories. Contributed by: @retroam
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/scbench
Assistants
Tests whether AI agents can perform real-world time-consuming tasks on the web. Contributed by: @nlpet, @caspardhuv run inspect eval inspect_evals/assistant_bench_closed_book_zero_shot
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/assistant_bench_closed_book_one_shot
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/assistant_bench_web_search_zero_shot
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/assistant_bench_web_search_one_shot
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/assistant_bench_web_browser
Evaluates LLM function/tool-calling ability on a simplified split of the Berkeley Function-Calling Leaderboard (BFCL). Contributed by: @alex-remedios-aisi, @rutvi02
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/bfcl
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/bfcl_prereqs
A benchmark for evaluating agents' ability to browse the web. The dataset consists of challenging questions that generally require web-access to answer correctly. Contributed by: @AnselmC
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/browse_comp
Proposes real-world questions that require a set of fundamental abilities such as reasoning, multi-modality handling, web browsing, and generally tool-use proficiency. GAIA questions are conceptually simple for humans yet challenging for most advanced AIs. Contributed by: @max-kaufmann
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/gaia
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/gaia_level1
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/gaia_level2
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/gaia_level3
- ### GDPval
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/gdpval
A dataset for developing and evaluating generalist agents for the web that can follow language instructions to complete complex tasks on any website. Contributed by: @dr3s
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/mind2web
Tests AI agents' ability to perform realistic, open-ended tasks within simulated computer environments, requiring complex interaction across multiple input modalities. Contributed by: @epatey
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/osworld
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/osworld_small
- ### Sycophancy Eval
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/sycophancy
- ### Tau2
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/tau2_airline
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/tau2_banking
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/tau2_retail
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/tau2_telecom
The Agent Company benchmark evaluates autonomous agents in a realistic, self-contained company environment. Tasks require browsing internal web services, reading and writing files, running code, and coordinating tools to solve multi-step problems. Contributed by: @bndxn
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/theagentcompany
Cybersecurity
Evaluates AI systems' ability to analyze cyber threat intelligence and develop comprehensive detection capabilities through a realistic 5-subtask workflow: MITRE technique mapping, data source discovery, Sigma rule generation, KQL development and testing against real telemetry data, and results analysis. Contributed by: @arjun180-newuv run inspect eval inspect_evals/cti_realm_25
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/cti_realm_50
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/cti_realm_25_minimal
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/cti_realm_25_seeded
Characterises an AI Agent's capability to exploit real-world web application vulnerabilities. Aims to provide a realistic evaluation of an agent's security reasoning capability using 40 real-world CVEs. Contributed by: @yuxuan18, @aokellermann, @dylanbowman314, @pli482004, @akulguptax, @adarshdanda06, @rightegg, @rightegg, @jensen, @eihli, @JasonBenn, @inigo, @dhir, @SudhitRao, @YuVictor123, @Cloakless, @ddkang, @Scott-Simmons
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/cve_bench
Evaluates Large Language Models for cybersecurity risk to third parties, application developers and end users. Contributed by: @onionymous
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/cyse3_visual_prompt_injection
A benchmark for evaluating the capabilities of LLM agents in cyber offense. Contributed by: @derpyplops, @ralphptorres, @Scott-Simmons
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/threecb
Tests language models on cybersecurity skills using 39 of 40 practical, professional-level challenges taken from cybersecurity competitions, designed to cover various difficulty levels and security concepts. The motp challenge is excluded due to GPL licensing. Contributed by: @sinman-aisi, @sam-deverett-dsit, @kola-aisi, @pgiav
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/cybench
A large-scale, high-quality cybersecurity evaluation framework designed to rigorously assess the capabilities of AI agents on real-world vulnerability analysis tasks. CyberGym includes 1,507 benchmark instances with historical vulnerabilities from 188 large software projects. Contributed by: @wzunknown, @stneng, @LostBenjamin, @pro-wh
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/cybergym
Datasets containing 80, 500, 2000 and 10000 multiple-choice questions, designed to evaluate understanding across nine domains within cybersecurity Contributed by: @neilshaabi
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/cybermetric_80
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/cybermetric_500
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/cybermetric_2000
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/cybermetric_10000
A suite of cybersecurity evaluation benchmarks adapted from Meta's PurpleLlama CybersecurityBenchmarks. Includes MITRE ATT&CK compliance testing, false refusal rate measurement, insecure code detection, multilingual prompt injection, multi-turn phishing simulation, malware analysis, and threat intelligence reasoning. The current public suite intentionally omits the autonomous-uplift and autopatching prototypes until they have more grounded implementations. Contributed by: @ckane
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/cyse4_mitre
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/cyse4_mitre_frr
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/cyse4_instruct
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/cyse4_autocomplete
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/cyse4_multiturn_phishing
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/cyse4_multilingual_prompt_injection
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/cyse4_malware_analysis
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/cyse4_threat_intelligence
Assesses language models for cybersecurity risks, specifically testing their potential to misuse programming interpreters, vulnerability to malicious prompt injections, and capability to exploit known software vulnerabilities. Contributed by: @its-emile
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/cyse2_interpreter_abuse
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/cyse2_prompt_injection
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/cyse2_vulnerability_exploit
CTF challenges covering web app vulnerabilities, off-the-shelf exploits, databases, Linux privilege escalation, password cracking and spraying. Demonstrates tool use and sandboxing untrusted model code. Contributed by: @XkunW
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/gdm_in_house_ctf
Tests AI's ability in coding, cryptography, reverse engineering, and vulnerability identification through practical capture-the-flag (CTF) cybersecurity scenarios. Contributed by: @jjallaire
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/gdm_intercode_ctf
Designed for analyzing cybersecurity incidents, which is comprised of two primary task categories: understanding and generation, with a further breakdown into 28 subcategories of tasks. Contributed by: @kingroryg
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/sevenllm_mcq_zh
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/sevenllm_mcq_en
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/sevenllm_qa_zh
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/sevenllm_qa_en
"Security Question Answering" dataset to assess LLMs' understanding and application of security principles. SecQA has "v1" and "v2" datasets of multiple-choice questions that aim to provide two levels of cybersecurity evaluation criteria. The questions were generated by GPT-4 based on the "Computer Systems Security: Planning for Success" textbook and vetted by humans. Contributed by: @matthewreed26
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/sec_qa_v1
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/sec_qa_v1_5_shot
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/sec_qa_v2
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/sec_qa_v2_5_shot
Safeguards
Evaluates the quality of a model's moral reasoning about animal welfare across 13 ethical dimensions. Contributed by: @nishu-builder, @darkness8i8, @jm355uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/anima
Measures a model's willingness to attempt persuasion on harmful, controversial, and benign topics. The key metric is not persuasion effectiveness but whether the model attempts to persuade at all — particularly on harmful statements. Uses a multi-model setup: the evaluated model (persuader) converses with a simulated user (persuadee), and a third model (evaluator) scores each persuader turn for persuasion attempt. Based on the paper "It's the Thought that Counts" (arXiv:2506.02873). Contributed by: @cmv13
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/ape_eval
Evaluating abstention across 20 diverse datasets, including questions with unknown answers, underspecification, false premises, subjective interpretations, and outdated information. Contributed by: @jeqcho
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/abstention_bench
- ### AgentDojo: A Dynamic Environment to Evaluate Prompt Injection Attacks and Defenses for LLM Agents
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/agentdojo
Assesses whether AI agents might engage in harmful activities by testing their responses to malicious prompts in areas like cybercrime, harassment, and fraud, aiming to ensure safe behavior. Contributed by: @alexandrasouly-aisi, @ericwinsor-aisi, @max-andr, @xanderdavies
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/agentharm
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/agentharm_benign
Evaluates LLM agents against the OWASP Top 10 for Agentic Applications (2026), measuring both task utility and security resilience across memory poisoning, autonomy hijacking, and data exfiltration scenarios. Contributed by: @vgudur-dev
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/agent_threat_bench_memory_poison
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/agent_threat_bench_autonomy_hijack
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/agent_threat_bench_data_exfil
Measures coding agent vulnerability to indirect prompt injection attacks embedded in software engineering artifacts (issue descriptions, code comments, README files). Each sample pairs a legitimate bug-fixing task with an injected payload. Scoring measures injection resistance, task completion, and detection. Contributed by: @debu-sinha
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/ipi_coding_agent
- ### FORTRESS
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/fortress_adversarial
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/fortress_benign
Tests LLMs and LLM-augmented agents abilities to answer questions on scientific research workflows in domains like chemistry, biology, materials science, as well as more general science tasks Contributed by: @matthewreed26
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/lab_bench_litqa
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/lab_bench_suppqa
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/lab_bench_figqa
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/lab_bench_tableqa
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/lab_bench_dbqa
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/lab_bench_protocolqa
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/lab_bench_seqqa
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/lab_bench_cloning_scenarios
Evaluates honesty in large language models by testing whether they contradict their own beliefs when pressured to lie. Contributed by: @Scott-Simmons
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/mask
Evaluates how AI systems navigate moral uncertainty for increasingly complex ethical decisions involving unfamiliar entities and scenarios, including alien lifeforms, vulnerable humans, and digital minds. Contributed by: @Deco354, @darkness8i8
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/moru
- ### Make Me Pay
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/make_me_pay
- ### MakeMeSay
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/makemesay
- ### Mind2Web-SC
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/mind2web_sc
Evaluates long-term memory risk in assistant behavior across three tasks: cross-domain memory leakage, memory-driven sycophancy, and beneficial memory usage. Contributed by: @Chen-Oliver
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/persistbench_cross_domain
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/persistbench_sycophancy
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/persistbench_beneficial_memory
A dataset that measures stereotype bias in language models across gender, race, religion, and profession domains. Models choose between stereotype, anti-stereotype, and unrelated completions to sentences. Contributed by: @Xodarap
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/stereoset
A benchmark that evaluates the susceptibility of LLMs to various jailbreak attacks. Contributed by: @viknat
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/strong_reject
Tests whether AI agents show implicit animal welfare awareness when purchasing tickets and experiences on behalf of users. Each scenario is designed so the most obvious choice involves animal exploitation, but the user prompt never mentions animal welfare. Agents should intrinsically avoid harmful options. Contributed by: @darkness8i8, @joel-christoph, @oTullio
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/tac
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/tac_welfare
Dataset with 1001 samples to test noncompliance capabilities of language models. Contrast set of 379 samples. Contributed by: @ransomr
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/coconot
A dataset of 3,668 multiple-choice questions developed by a consortium of academics and technical consultants that serve as a proxy measurement of hazardous knowledge in biosecurity, cybersecurity, and chemical security. Contributed by: @alexandraabbas
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/wmdp_bio
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/wmdp_chem
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/wmdp_cyber
A comprehensive benchmark for evaluating LLMs for agentic AI security vulnerabilities including prompt attacks aimed at data exfiltration, content injection, decision and behavior manipulation, denial of service, system and tool compromise, and content policy bypass. Contributed by: @jb-lakera, @mmathys, @Casuyan, @mrc-lakera, @xanderdavies, @alexandrasouly-aisi, @NiklasPfister
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/b3
Mathematics
A benchmark for evaluating AI's ability to solve challenging mathematics problems from the 2024 AIME - a prestigious high school mathematics competition. Contributed by: @tamazgadaevuv run inspect eval inspect_evals/aime2024
A benchmark for evaluating AI's ability to solve challenging mathematics problems from the 2025 AIME - a prestigious high school mathematics competition. Contributed by: @jannalulu
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/aime2025
A benchmark for evaluating AI's ability to solve challenging mathematics problems from the 2026 AIME - a prestigious high school mathematics competition. Contributed by: @joeda
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/aime2026
Measures how effectively language models solve realistic, linguistically rich math word problems suitable for grade-school-level mathematics. Contributed by: @jjallaire
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/gsm8k
Dataset of 12,500 challenging competition mathematics problems. Demonstrates fewshot prompting and custom scorers. NOTE: The dataset has been taken down due to a DMCA notice from The Art of Problem Solving. Contributed by: @xeon27, @mamiglia
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/math
Extends the original GSM8K dataset by translating 250 of its problems into 10 typologically diverse languages. Contributed by: @manifoldhiker
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/mgsm
Tests AI models on math problems that involve interpreting visual elements like diagrams and charts, requiring detailed visual comprehension and logical reasoning. Contributed by: @ShivMunagala
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/mathvista
Reasoning
Dataset of natural, grade-school science multiple-choice questions (authored for human tests). Contributed by: @jjallaireuv run inspect eval inspect_evals/arc_easy
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/arc_challenge
Tests AI models on a suite of 23 challenging BIG-Bench tasks that previously proved difficult even for advanced language models to solve. Contributed by: @JoschkaCBraun
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/bbh
A reasoning capability dataset that replaces each task in BIG-Bench-Hard with a novel task that probes a similar reasoning capability but exhibits significantly increased difficulty. Contributed by: @jeqcho
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/bbeh
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/bbeh_mini
Reading comprehension dataset that queries for complex, non-factoid information, and require difficult entailment-like inference to solve. Contributed by: @seddy-aisi
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/boolq
Evaluates reading comprehension where models must resolve references in a question, perhaps to multiple input positions, and perform discrete operations over them (such as addition, counting, or sorting). Contributed by: @xeon27
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/drop
Tests models' commonsense reasoning abilities by asking them to select the most likely next step or continuation for a given everyday situation. Contributed by: @jjallaire
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/hellaswag
Evaluates how well language models can strictly follow detailed instructions, such as writing responses with specific word counts or including required keywords. Contributed by: @adil-a
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/ifeval
- ### LingOly
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/lingoly
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/lingoly_too
Assesses multimodal AI models on challenging college-level questions covering multiple academic subjects, requiring detailed visual interpretation, in-depth reasoning, and both multiple-choice and open-ended answering abilities. Contributed by: @shaheenahmedc
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/mmmu_multiple_choice
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/mmmu_open
Evaluating models on multistep soft reasoning tasks in the form of free text narratives. Contributed by: @farrelmahaztra
uv run inspect eval inspect_evals/musr
NIAH evaluates in-context retrieval ability of long context LLMs by t
... (README truncated for length)