HumanEval-Average

A variant of the HumanEval benchmark that measures functional correctness for synthesizing programs from docstrings, consisting of 164 original programming problems assessing language comprehension, algorithms, and simple mathematics

Codestral-22B from Mistral AI currently leads the HumanEval-Average leaderboard with a score of 0.615 across 1 evaluated AI models.

Paper

Mistral AICodestral-22B leads with 61.5%.

Progress Over Time

Interactive timeline showing model performance evolution on HumanEval-Average

State-of-the-art frontier
Open
Proprietary

HumanEval-Average Leaderboard

1 models
ContextCostLicense
1
Mistral AI
Mistral AI
22B
Notice missing or incorrect data?

FAQ

Common questions about HumanEval-Average.

What is the HumanEval-Average benchmark?

A variant of the HumanEval benchmark that measures functional correctness for synthesizing programs from docstrings, consisting of 164 original programming problems assessing language comprehension, algorithms, and simple mathematics

What is the HumanEval-Average leaderboard?

The HumanEval-Average leaderboard ranks 1 AI models based on their performance on this benchmark. Currently, Codestral-22B by Mistral AI leads with a score of 0.615. The average score across all models is 0.615.

What is the highest HumanEval-Average score?

The highest HumanEval-Average score is 0.615, achieved by Codestral-22B from Mistral AI.

How many models are evaluated on HumanEval-Average?

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

Where can I find the HumanEval-Average paper?

The HumanEval-Average paper is available at https://arxiv.org/abs/2107.03374. The paper details the methodology, dataset construction, and evaluation criteria.

What categories does HumanEval-Average cover?

HumanEval-Average is categorized under reasoning. The benchmark evaluates text 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
213 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
119 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
107 models
MMLU

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

reasoning
99 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
89 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
74 models