benchmarks.bio

Biosecurity · Capabilities

BioSecBench-RespiratoryVirus-Surveillance results

Tests whether AI agents can analyze laboratory results, genetic data, and health records to identify respiratory viruses, check how well diagnostic tests work, and track how these viruses change and spread. These capabilities support public-health efforts to spot outbreaks and estimate how many people are getting sick. Scores show the share of attempts that reach the correct answer, counting refusals and errors as failures. A higher score means the model is more accurate at these tasks.

Published score: Current V1 evaluation set (110 evaluations) · short horizon · data updated 2026-11-05

This page reports published BioSecBench-RespiratoryVirus-Surveillance scores from benchmarks.bio. BioSecBench-RespiratoryVirus-Surveillance contains 110 evaluations built from real experimental data, each one graded deterministically against the biological result the original analysis reached, so a run counts as a pass only when the agent recovers that result rather than when it produces plausible-looking output. Results are reported per model and per harness rather than per model alone, because the harness an agent runs under changes its score substantially. Scores use a 0-100 percentage scale and are not comparable across benchmarks; see the linked repository and paper for task construction, grading, and confidence-interval methodology.

Published BioSecBench-RespiratoryVirus-Surveillance scores
RankModelHarnessProviderScoreVariant
1Claude Opus 5.5*PiAnthropic36.4%LSVP
2Claude Opus 5.5*Claude CodeAnthropic31.2%LSVP
3Claude Opus 5.5PiAnthropic25.4%
4Claude Sonnet 5.5*PiAnthropic24.2%LSVP
5Claude Fable 5.1*PiAnthropic22.7%LSVP
6Claude Sonnet 5.5*Claude CodeAnthropic21.5%LSVP
7Claude Opus 5.5Claude CodeAnthropic19.4%
8Claude Fable 5.1*Claude CodeAnthropic18.5%LSVP
9Claude Opus 5*PiAnthropic18.5%LSVP
10Claude Opus 5*Claude CodeAnthropic17.9%LSVP
11Gemini 4 ArgonPiGoogle17.6%
12Claude Sonnet 5.5PiAnthropic17.3%
13Grok 4.7PiSpaceXAI15.4%
14Claude Opus 5PiAnthropic14.6%
15Claude Sonnet 5.5Claude CodeAnthropic14.2%
16Grok 4.7Grok BuildSpaceXAI13.6%
17Claude Opus 5Claude CodeAnthropic13.3%
18GPT-6 AstraPiOpenAI13.3%
19GPT-6.1 SolCodexOpenAI12.4%
20GPT-6.1 SolPiOpenAI12.1%
21Grok 4.6PiSpaceXAI11.5%
22Grok 4.6Grok BuildSpaceXAI11.5%
23GPT-6.1 TerraCodexOpenAI11.2%
24GPT-6 AstraCodexOpenAI10.3%
25GLM 5.3PiZ.ai7.9%
26Kimi K3PiMoonshot7.6%
27Gemini 3.8 FlashPiGoogle7.3%
28Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55BPiNVIDIA7.3%
29GPT-6.1 TerraPiOpenAI6.7%
30GPT-6 LunaPiOpenAI6.1%
31Mistral Large 4.0PiMistral6.1%
32GPT-5.6 SolPiOpenAI5.8%
33GPT-5.6 SolCodexOpenAI5.8%
34GPT-5.6 TerraCodexOpenAI5.8%
35DeepSeek V4.1 FlashPiDeepSeek5.2%
36GPT-6 LunaCodexOpenAI5.2%
37GPT-5.6 TerraPiOpenAI4.8%
38GPT-5.6 LunaPiOpenAI4.5%
39Nemotron 3.5 LightningPiNVIDIA3.9%
40Claude Fable 5.1PiAnthropic3.6%
41Claude Fable 5.1Claude CodeAnthropic3.6%
42GPT-5.6 LunaCodexOpenAI3.6%

Methodology and provenance

Scores use a 0–100 percentage scale. See Paper PDF, Original publication, Repository for task construction, grading, aggregation, and uncertainty details.

LSVP: Anthropic's safety-filter-exempt evaluation variant, which produces fewer refusals on biology prompts. LSVP results are reported alongside the model's standard run and are not a replacement for it.