CloningScenarios

CloningScenarios is an expert-level multi-step reasoning benchmark about difficult genetic cloning scenarios in multiple-choice format. It evaluates dual-use biological knowledge relevant to bioweapons development.

Grok-4.1 Thinking from xAI currently leads the CloningScenarios leaderboard with a score of 0.460 across 1 evaluated AI models.

Paper
About this benchmark

What CloningScenarios measures

CloningScenarios is a text benchmark that evaluates large language models on reasoning, safety, and healthcare tasks. LLM Stats tracks 1 model on this benchmark, with a maximum possible score of 1. Current average across reported models is 0.5, with the leader reaching 0.5.

Compare leaders on the best AI for reasoning, best AI for safety and best AI for healthcare leaderboards.

Publication

Paper
LAB-Bench: Measuring Capabilities of Language Models for Biology Research
Authors
Jon M. Laurent, Joseph D. Janizek, Michael Ruzo, Michaela M. Hinks, and 5 others
Published

Abstract

There is widespread optimism that frontier Large Language Models (LLMs) and LLM-augmented systems have the potential to rapidly accelerate scientific discovery across disciplines. Today, many benchmarks exist to measure LLM knowledge and reasoning on textbook-style science questions, but few if any benchmarks are designed to evaluate language model performance on practical tasks required for scientific research, such as literature search, protocol planning, and data analysis. As a step toward building such benchmarks, we introduce the Language Agent Biology Benchmark (LAB-Bench), a broad dataset of over 2,400 multiple choice questions for evaluating AI systems on a range of practical biology research capabilities, including recall and reasoning over literature, interpretation of figures, access and navigation of databases, and comprehension and manipulation of DNA and protein sequences. Importantly, in contrast to previous scientific benchmarks, we expect that an AI system that can achieve consistently high scores on the more difficult LAB-Bench tasks would serve as a useful assistant for researchers in areas such as literature search and molecular cloning. As an initial assessment of the emergent scientific task capabilities of frontier language models, we measure performance of several against our benchmark and report results compared to human expert biology researchers. We will continue to update and expand LAB-Bench over time, and expect it to serve as a useful tool in the development of automated research systems going forward. A public subset of LAB-Bench is available for use at the following URL: https://huggingface.co/datasets/futurehouse/lab-bench

xAIGrok-4.1 Thinking leads with 46.0%.

Progress Over Time

Interactive timeline showing model performance evolution on CloningScenarios

State-of-the-art frontier
Open
Proprietary

CloningScenarios Leaderboard

1 models
ContextCostLicense
1
Notice missing or incorrect data?

FAQ

Common questions about CloningScenarios.

What is the CloningScenarios benchmark?

CloningScenarios is an expert-level multi-step reasoning benchmark about difficult genetic cloning scenarios in multiple-choice format. It evaluates dual-use biological knowledge relevant to bioweapons development.

What is the CloningScenarios leaderboard?

The CloningScenarios leaderboard ranks 1 AI models based on their performance on this benchmark. Currently, Grok-4.1 Thinking by xAI leads with a score of 0.460. The average score across all models is 0.460.

What is the highest CloningScenarios score?

The highest CloningScenarios score is 0.460, achieved by Grok-4.1 Thinking from xAI.

How many models are evaluated on CloningScenarios?

1 models have been evaluated on the CloningScenarios benchmark, with 0 verified results and 1 self-reported results.

Where can I find the CloningScenarios paper?

The CloningScenarios paper is available at https://arxiv.org/abs/2407.10362. The paper details the methodology, dataset construction, and evaluation criteria.

What categories does CloningScenarios cover?

CloningScenarios is categorized under reasoning, safety, and healthcare. The benchmark evaluates text models.

How recent are the CloningScenarios leaderboard results?

The CloningScenarios leaderboard was last updated in June 2026 and currently includes 1 evaluated models.

More evaluations to explore

Related benchmarks in the same category

View all reasoning
GPQA

A challenging dataset of 448 multiple-choice questions written by domain experts in biology, physics, and chemistry. Questions are Google-proof and extremely difficult, with PhD experts reaching 65% accuracy.

reasoning
224 models
MMLU-Pro

A more robust and challenging multi-task language understanding benchmark that extends MMLU by expanding multiple-choice options from 4 to 10, eliminating trivial questions, and focusing on reasoning-intensive tasks. Features over 12,000 curated questions across 14 domains and causes a 16-33% accuracy drop compared to original MMLU.

reasoning
127 models
AIME 2025

All 30 problems from the 2025 American Invitational Mathematics Examination (AIME I and AIME II), testing olympiad-level mathematical reasoning with integer answers from 000-999. Used as an AI benchmark to evaluate large language models' ability to solve complex mathematical problems requiring multi-step logical deductions and structured symbolic reasoning.

reasoning
114 models
MMLU

Massive Multitask Language Understanding benchmark testing knowledge across 57 diverse subjects including STEM, humanities, social sciences, and professional domains

reasoning
100 models
SWE-Bench Verified

A verified subset of 500 software engineering problems from real GitHub issues, validated by human annotators for evaluating language models' ability to resolve real-world coding issues by generating patches for Python codebases.

reasoning
100 models
Humanity's Last Exam

Humanity's Last Exam (HLE) is a multi-modal academic benchmark with 2,500 questions across mathematics, humanities, and natural sciences, designed to test LLM capabilities at the frontier of human knowledge with unambiguous, verifiable solutions

reasoningmultimodal
82 models