HumanEval Plus

Enhanced version of HumanEval that extends the original test cases by 80x using EvalPlus framework for rigorous evaluation of LLM-synthesized code functional correctness, detecting previously undetected wrong code

Mistral Small 3.2 24B Instruct from Mistral AI currently leads the HumanEval Plus leaderboard with a score of 0.929 across 1 evaluated AI models.

Paper

Progress Over Time

Interactive timeline showing model performance evolution on HumanEval Plus

State-of-the-art frontier
Open
Proprietary

HumanEval Plus Leaderboard

1 models
ContextCostLicense
124B
Notice missing or incorrect data?

FAQ

Common questions about HumanEval Plus.

What is the HumanEval Plus benchmark?

Enhanced version of HumanEval that extends the original test cases by 80x using EvalPlus framework for rigorous evaluation of LLM-synthesized code functional correctness, detecting previously undetected wrong code

What is the HumanEval Plus leaderboard?

The HumanEval Plus leaderboard ranks 1 AI models based on their performance on this benchmark. Currently, Mistral Small 3.2 24B Instruct by Mistral AI leads with a score of 0.929. The average score across all models is 0.929.

What is the highest HumanEval Plus score?

The highest HumanEval Plus score is 0.929, achieved by Mistral Small 3.2 24B Instruct from Mistral AI.

How many models are evaluated on HumanEval Plus?

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

Where can I find the HumanEval Plus paper?

The HumanEval Plus paper is available at https://arxiv.org/abs/2305.01210. The paper details the methodology, dataset construction, and evaluation criteria.

What categories does HumanEval Plus cover?

HumanEval Plus is categorized under code and reasoning. The benchmark evaluates text models.

More evaluations to explore

Related benchmarks in the same category

View all code
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
214 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
109 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.

code
90 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
75 models