| 1 report | ChemBench · Human-evaluation subset · accuracy[1]ChemBench · published model comparison | Leads this displayed comparison. Source notesSource cell: 0.80 |
|---|
| 1 report | ChemBench · Human-evaluation subset · accuracy[1]ChemBench · published model comparison | #2 of 31 in this displayed comparison; 4 pp below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 0.76 |
|---|
| 1 report | ChemBench · Human-evaluation subset · accuracy[1]ChemBench · published model comparison | #3 of 31 in this displayed comparison; 7 pp below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 0.73 |
|---|
| 1 report | ChemBench · Human-evaluation subset · accuracy[1]ChemBench · published model comparison | #4 of 31 in this displayed comparison; 8 pp below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 0.72 |
|---|
| 1 report | ChemBench · Human-evaluation subset · accuracy[1]ChemBench · published model comparison | #5 of 31 in this displayed comparison; 11 pp below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 0.69 |
|---|
| 1 report | ChemBench · Human-evaluation subset · accuracy[1]ChemBench · published model comparison | #6 of 31 in this displayed comparison; 12 pp below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 0.68 |
|---|
| 1 report | ChemBench · Human-evaluation subset · accuracy[1]ChemBench · published model comparison | #7 of 31 in this displayed comparison; 13 pp below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 0.67 |
|---|
| 1 report | ChemBench · Human-evaluation subset · accuracy[1]ChemBench · published model comparison | #7 of 31 in this displayed comparison; 13 pp below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 0.67 |
|---|
| 1 report | ChemBench · Human-evaluation subset · accuracy[1]ChemBench · published model comparison | #9 of 31 in this displayed comparison; 16 pp below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 0.64 |
|---|
| 1 report | ChemBench · Human-evaluation subset · accuracy[1]ChemBench · published model comparison | #9 of 31 in this displayed comparison; 16 pp below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 0.64 |
|---|
| 1 report | ChemBench · Human-evaluation subset · accuracy[1]ChemBench · published model comparison | #11 of 31 in this displayed comparison; 18 pp below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 0.62 |
|---|
| 1 report | ChemBench · Human-evaluation subset · accuracy[1]ChemBench · published model comparison | #12 of 31 in this displayed comparison; 20 pp below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 0.60 |
|---|
| 1 report | ChemBench · Human-evaluation subset · accuracy[1]ChemBench · published model comparison | #13 of 31 in this displayed comparison; 21 pp below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 0.59 |
|---|
| 1 report | ChemBench · Human-evaluation subset · accuracy[1]ChemBench · published model comparison | #14 of 31 in this displayed comparison; 23 pp below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 0.57 |
|---|
| 1 report | ChemBench · Human-evaluation subset · accuracy[1]ChemBench · published model comparison | #15 of 31 in this displayed comparison; 29 pp below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 0.51 |
|---|
| 1 report | ChemBench · Human-evaluation subset · accuracy[1]ChemBench · published model comparison | #16 of 31 in this displayed comparison; 31 pp below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 0.49 |
|---|
| 1 report | ChemBench · Human-evaluation subset · accuracy[1]ChemBench · published model comparison | #16 of 31 in this displayed comparison; 31 pp below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 0.49 |
|---|
| 1 report | ChemBench · Human-evaluation subset · accuracy[1]ChemBench · published model comparison | #18 of 31 in this displayed comparison; 34 pp below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 0.46 |
|---|
| 1 report | ChemBench · Human-evaluation subset · accuracy[1]ChemBench · published model comparison | #18 of 31 in this displayed comparison; 34 pp below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 0.46 |
|---|
| 1 report | ChemBench · Human-evaluation subset · accuracy[1]ChemBench · published model comparison | #20 of 31 in this displayed comparison; 35 pp below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 0.45 |
|---|
| 1 report | ChemBench · Human-evaluation subset · accuracy[1]ChemBench · published model comparison | #20 of 31 in this displayed comparison; 35 pp below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 0.45 |
|---|
| 1 report | ChemBench · Human-evaluation subset · accuracy[1]ChemBench · published model comparison | #22 of 31 in this displayed comparison; 36 pp below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 0.44 |
|---|
| 1 report | ChemBench · Human-evaluation subset · accuracy[1]ChemBench · published model comparison | #22 of 31 in this displayed comparison; 36 pp below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 0.44 |
|---|
| 1 report | ChemBench · Human-evaluation subset · accuracy[1]ChemBench · published model comparison | #22 of 31 in this displayed comparison; 36 pp below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 0.44 |
|---|
| 1 report | ChemBench · Human-evaluation subset · accuracy[1]ChemBench · published model comparison | #25 of 31 in this displayed comparison; 38 pp below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 0.42 |
|---|
| 1 report | ChemBench · Human-evaluation subset · accuracy[1]ChemBench · published model comparison | #26 of 31 in this displayed comparison; 44 pp below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 0.36 |
|---|
| 1 report | ChemBench · Human-evaluation subset · accuracy[1]ChemBench · published model comparison | #26 of 31 in this displayed comparison; 44 pp below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 0.36 |
|---|
| 1 report | ChemBench · Human-evaluation subset · accuracy[1]ChemBench · published model comparison | #28 of 31 in this displayed comparison; 45 pp below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 0.35 |
|---|
| 1 report | ChemBench · Human-evaluation subset · accuracy[1]ChemBench · published model comparison | #29 of 31 in this displayed comparison; 46 pp below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 0.34 |
|---|
| 1 report | ChemBench · Human-evaluation subset · accuracy[1]ChemBench · published model comparison | #30 of 31 in this displayed comparison; 66 pp below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 0.14 |
|---|
| 1 report | ChemBench · Human-evaluation subset · accuracy[1]ChemBench · published model comparison | #31 of 31 in this displayed comparison; 78 pp below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 0.02 |
|---|
| 1 report | ChemBench · Overall accuracy[1]ChemBench · published model comparison | Leads this displayed comparison. Source notesSource cell: 0.64 |
|---|
| 1 report | ChemBench · Overall accuracy[1]ChemBench · published model comparison | #2 of 31 in this displayed comparison; 1 pp below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 0.63 |
|---|
| 1 report | ChemBench · Overall accuracy[1]ChemBench · published model comparison | #3 of 31 in this displayed comparison; 2 pp below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 0.62 |
|---|
| 1 report | ChemBench · Overall accuracy[1]ChemBench · published model comparison | #4 of 31 in this displayed comparison; 3 pp below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 0.61 |
|---|
| 1 report | ChemBench · Overall accuracy[1]ChemBench · published model comparison | #5 of 31 in this displayed comparison; 6 pp below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 0.58 |
|---|
| 1 report | ChemBench · Overall accuracy[1]ChemBench · published model comparison | #6 of 31 in this displayed comparison; 7 pp below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 0.57 |
|---|
| 1 report | ChemBench · Overall accuracy[1]ChemBench · published model comparison | #6 of 31 in this displayed comparison; 7 pp below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 0.57 |
|---|
| 1 report | ChemBench · Overall accuracy[1]ChemBench · published model comparison | #6 of 31 in this displayed comparison; 7 pp below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 0.57 |
|---|
| 1 report | ChemBench · Overall accuracy[1]ChemBench · published model comparison | #9 of 31 in this displayed comparison; 11 pp below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 0.53 |
|---|
| 1 report | ChemBench · Overall accuracy[1]ChemBench · published model comparison | #10 of 31 in this displayed comparison; 12 pp below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 0.52 |
|---|
| 1 report | ChemBench · Overall accuracy[1]ChemBench · published model comparison | #10 of 31 in this displayed comparison; 12 pp below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 0.52 |
|---|
| 1 report | ChemBench · Overall accuracy[1]ChemBench · published model comparison | #12 of 31 in this displayed comparison; 13 pp below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 0.51 |
|---|
| 1 report | ChemBench · Overall accuracy[1]ChemBench · published model comparison | #12 of 31 in this displayed comparison; 13 pp below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 0.51 |
|---|
| 1 report | ChemBench · Overall accuracy[1]ChemBench · published model comparison | #14 of 31 in this displayed comparison; 16 pp below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 0.48 |
|---|
| 1 report | ChemBench · Overall accuracy[1]ChemBench · published model comparison | #14 of 31 in this displayed comparison; 16 pp below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 0.48 |
|---|
| 1 report | ChemBench · Overall accuracy[1]ChemBench · published model comparison | #16 of 31 in this displayed comparison; 17 pp below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 0.47 |
|---|
| 1 report | ChemBench · Overall accuracy[1]ChemBench · published model comparison | #16 of 31 in this displayed comparison; 17 pp below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 0.47 |
|---|
| 1 report | ChemBench · Overall accuracy[1]ChemBench · published model comparison | #16 of 31 in this displayed comparison; 17 pp below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 0.47 |
|---|
| 1 report | ChemBench · Overall accuracy[1]ChemBench · published model comparison | #16 of 31 in this displayed comparison; 17 pp below the leader. Source notesSource cell: 0.47 |
|---|