| 1 report | AgentBench & ToolBench · AgentBench overall[1]Original standard test set | Leads this displayed comparison. Source notesSource cell: 4.01 |
|---|
| 1 report | AgentBench & ToolBench · AgentBench overall[1]Original standard test set | #2 of 29 in this displayed comparison; 0.9 points below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 3.11 |
|---|
| 1 report | AgentBench & ToolBench · AgentBench overall[1]Original standard test set | #3 of 29 in this displayed comparison; 1.12 points below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 2.89 |
|---|
| 1 report | AgentBench & ToolBench · AgentBench overall[1]Original standard test set | #4 of 29 in this displayed comparison; 1.52 points below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 2.49 |
|---|
| 1 report | AgentBench & ToolBench · AgentBench overall[1]Original standard test set | #5 of 29 in this displayed comparison; 1.57 points below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 2.44 |
|---|
| 1 report | AgentBench & ToolBench · AgentBench overall[1]Original standard test set | #6 of 29 in this displayed comparison; 1.69 points below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 2.32 |
|---|
| 1 report | AgentBench & ToolBench · AgentBench overall[1]Original standard test set | #7 of 29 in this displayed comparison; 2.3 points below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 1.71 |
|---|
| 1 report | AgentBench & ToolBench · AgentBench overall[1]Original standard test set | #8 of 29 in this displayed comparison; 2.41 points below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 1.60 |
|---|
| 1 report | AgentBench & ToolBench · AgentBench overall[1]Original standard test set | #9 of 29 in this displayed comparison; 2.62 points below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 1.39 |
|---|
| 1 report | AgentBench & ToolBench · AgentBench overall[1]Original standard test set | #10 of 29 in this displayed comparison; 2.76 points below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 1.25 |
|---|
| 1 report | AgentBench & ToolBench · AgentBench overall[1]Original standard test set | #11 of 29 in this displayed comparison; 3.05 points below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 0.96 |
|---|
| 1 report | AgentBench & ToolBench · AgentBench overall[1]Original standard test set | #12 of 29 in this displayed comparison; 3.08 points below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 0.93 |
|---|
| 1 report | AgentBench & ToolBench · AgentBench overall[1]Original standard test set | #13 of 29 in this displayed comparison; 3.23 points below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 0.78 |
|---|
| 1 report | AgentBench & ToolBench · AgentBench overall[1]Original standard test set | #14 of 29 in this displayed comparison; 3.24 points below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 0.77 |
|---|
| 1 report | AgentBench & ToolBench · AgentBench overall[1]Original standard test set | #15 of 29 in this displayed comparison; 3.28 points below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 0.73 |
|---|
| 1 report | AgentBench & ToolBench · AgentBench overall[1]Original standard test set | #16 of 29 in this displayed comparison; 3.31 points below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 0.70 |
|---|
| 1 report | AgentBench & ToolBench · AgentBench overall[1]Original standard test set | #17 of 29 in this displayed comparison; 3.35 points below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 0.66 |
|---|
| 1 report | AgentBench & ToolBench · AgentBench overall[1]Original standard test set | #18 of 29 in this displayed comparison; 3.45 points below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 0.56 |
|---|
| 1 report | AgentBench & ToolBench · AgentBench overall[1]Original standard test set | #18 of 29 in this displayed comparison; 3.45 points below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 0.56 |
|---|
| 1 report | AgentBench & ToolBench · AgentBench overall[1]Original standard test set | #20 of 29 in this displayed comparison; 3.47 points below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 0.54 |
|---|
| 1 report | AgentBench & ToolBench · AgentBench overall[1]Original standard test set | #21 of 29 in this displayed comparison; 3.51 points below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 0.50 |
|---|
| 1 report | AgentBench & ToolBench · AgentBench overall[1]Original standard test set | #22 of 29 in this displayed comparison; 3.55 points below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 0.46 |
|---|
| 1 report | AgentBench & ToolBench · AgentBench overall[1]Original standard test set | #23 of 29 in this displayed comparison; 3.62 points below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 0.39 |
|---|
| 1 report | AgentBench & ToolBench · AgentBench overall[1]Original standard test set | #24 of 29 in this displayed comparison; 3.67 points below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 0.34 |
|---|
| 1 report | AgentBench & ToolBench · AgentBench overall[1]Original standard test set | #24 of 29 in this displayed comparison; 3.67 points below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 0.34 |
|---|
| 1 report | AgentBench & ToolBench · AgentBench overall[1]Original standard test set | #26 of 29 in this displayed comparison; 3.74 points below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 0.27 |
|---|
| 1 report | AgentBench & ToolBench · AgentBench overall[1]Original standard test set | #27 of 29 in this displayed comparison; 3.87 points below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 0.14 |
|---|
| 1 report | AgentBench & ToolBench · AgentBench overall[1]Original standard test set | #28 of 29 in this displayed comparison; 3.9 points below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 0.11 |
|---|
| 1 report | AgentBench & ToolBench · AgentBench overall[1]Original standard test set | #29 of 29 in this displayed comparison; 3.98 points below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 0.03 |
|---|