Skip to content
kalanu
Knowledge & reasoning

IFEval-style

69 tasks, v1, graded by the benchmark's own declared checks.

In the leaderboard

Every setup scored on IFEval, whichever other benchmarks it covers. The leaderboard compares a setup only with setups scored on exactly the same benchmarks, so its bands can differ from these.

rank on this benchmarkSetupScorePass ratecost · tokens · timemedian spend of a passing run
1–12Codex · gpt-5.4-minias published88.5 pts86.1–89.9 pts100.0%≥ 94.8%100.0% · 69 of 69 graded0.37× · 0.83× · 0.85×$0.0029 · 10.7k · 14.5s91% cache reads
1–12Claude Agent SDK · claude-haiku-4-5-20251001as published84.9 pts81.9–86.8 pts98.6%95.7–100.0%98.6% · 69 of 69 graded1.1× · 2.3× · 0.39×$0.01 · 29.9k · 7.1scache reads not recorded
1–12Codex · gpt-6.1-solas published79.2 pts76.3–80.7 pts98.6%95.7–100.0%98.6% · 69 of 69 graded3.4× · 0.95× · 1.2×$0.03 · 12.1k · 22.3s0% cache reads
1–12OpenClaw · claude-haiku-4-5-20251001as published78.9 pts76.4–80.3 pts98.6%95.7–100.0%98.6% · 69 of 69 graded0.92× · 2.8× · 2.6×$0.01 · 37.4k · 48.7scache reads not recorded
1–12Claude Code · claude-sonnet-5-5as published78.7 pts76.2–80.2 pts98.6%95.7–100.0%98.6% · 69 of 69 graded2.4× · 1.9× · 1.1×$0.02 · 29.7k · 21.4s87% cache reads
1–12Claude Code · claude-haiku-4-5-20251001as published76.9 pts72.6–80.6 pts94.2%88.4–98.6%94.2% · 69 of 69 graded1.1× · 2.6× · 1.0×$0.01 · 34.7k · 18.3s90% cache reads
1–12DeepAgents · claude-haiku-4-5-20251001as published73.8 pts65.6–81.0 pts78.3%68.1–88.4%78.3% · 69 of 69 graded1.1× · 0.42× · 0.35×$0.01 · 9.1k · 6.3scache reads not recorded
1–12DeepSeek Harness · claude-haiku-4-5-20251001as published73.6 pts65.5–80.1 pts82.6%72.5–91.3%82.6% · 69 of 69 graded0.74× · 1.0× · 0.50×$0.01 · 22.3k · 9.7scache reads not recorded
1–12Aider · claude-haiku-4-5-20251001as published70.2 pts62.0–78.2 pts71.0%60.9–81.2%71.0% · 69 of 69 graded0.49× · 0.21× · 1.1×$0.0038 · 2.7k · 20.4scache reads not recorded
1–12eve · claude-haiku-4-5-20251001as published69.9 pts61.2–78.5 pts75.4%65.2–85.5%75.4% · 69 of 69 graded1.1× · 0.45× · 0.44×$0.01 · 8.7k · 8.3scache reads not recorded
1–12Hermes · claude-haiku-4-5-20251001as published69.8 pts62.8–76.7 pts79.7%71.0–88.4%79.7% · 69 of 69 graded0.45× · 1.1× · 1.6×$0.0035 · 13.2k · 30.4scache reads not recorded
1–12opencode · claude-haiku-4-5-20251001as published62.7 pts54.5–70.5 pts65.2%55.1–75.4%65.2% · 69 of 69 graded0.35× · 0.67× · 1.0×$0.0026 · 8.3k · 18.5scache reads not recorded
Spend per pass
SetupSpend per pass · costSpend per pass · tokensSpend per pass · time
Codex · gpt-5.4-mini · as published$0.01 per pass($0.0050–$0.01)39% went to the costliest 10% of attempts (7 of 69)14k per pass(11.2k–18.3k)31% went to the costliest 10% of attempts (7 of 69)of which 60% cache reads and 36% fresh input17.5s per pass(15.9s–19.2s)20% went to the costliest 10% of attempts (7 of 69)
Claude Agent SDK · claude-haiku-4-5-20251001 · as published$0.01 per pass($0.01–$0.02)30% went to the costliest 10% of attempts (7 of 69)35k per pass(32.1k–38.5k)20% went to the costliest 10% of attempts (7 of 69)cache split not recorded on 69 attempts11.9s per pass(9.2s–15.2s)36% went to the costliest 10% of attempts (7 of 69)
Codex · gpt-6.1-sol · as published$0.03 per pass($0.03–$0.04)21% went to the costliest 10% of attempts (7 of 69)15.2k per pass(13.5k–17.1k)23% went to the costliest 10% of attempts (7 of 69)of which 5% cache reads and 92% fresh input25.6s per pass(23.1s–28.7s)20% went to the costliest 10% of attempts (7 of 69)
OpenClaw · claude-haiku-4-5-20251001 · as published$0.01 per pass($0.01–$0.01)28% went to the costliest 10% of attempts (7 of 69)42.3k per pass(38.7k–47k)19% went to the costliest 10% of attempts (7 of 69)cache split not recorded on 69 attempts52.2s per pass(49.3s–56s)15% went to the costliest 10% of attempts (7 of 69)
Claude Code · claude-sonnet-5-5 · as published$0.03 per pass($0.02–$0.03)27% went to the costliest 10% of attempts (7 of 69)32k per pass(29.9k–35k)15% went to the costliest 10% of attempts (7 of 69)of which 85% cache reads and 11% fresh input24.8s per pass(21.8s–29.2s)22% went to the costliest 10% of attempts (7 of 69)
Claude Code · claude-haiku-4-5-20251001 · as published$0.01 per pass($0.01–$0.02)27% went to the costliest 10% of attempts (7 of 69)40.1k per pass(36.9k–44.2k)17% went to the costliest 10% of attempts (7 of 69)of which 90% cache reads and 8% fresh input22.9s per pass(19.9s–27.6s)22% went to the costliest 10% of attempts (7 of 69)
DeepAgents · claude-haiku-4-5-20251001 · as published$0.02 per pass($0.01–$0.02)22% went to the costliest 10% of attempts (7 of 69)10.8k per pass(9.1k–12.7k)19% went to the costliest 10% of attempts (7 of 69)cache split not recorded on 69 attempts10.8s per pass(8.8s–13s)27% went to the costliest 10% of attempts (7 of 69)
DeepSeek Harness · claude-haiku-4-5-20251001 · as published$0.01 per pass($0.01–$0.02)38% went to the costliest 10% of attempts (7 of 69)26k per pass(21.7k–31.3k)26% went to the costliest 10% of attempts (7 of 69)cache split not recorded on 69 attempts16.9s per pass(12.6s–22.9s)37% went to the costliest 10% of attempts (7 of 69)
Aider · claude-haiku-4-5-20251001 · as published$0.01 per pass($0.01–$0.01)22% went to the costliest 10% of attempts (7 of 69)3.9k per pass(3.4k–4.6k)14% went to the costliest 10% of attempts (7 of 69)cache split not recorded on 69 attempts30.2s per pass(26.3s–35.4s)15% went to the costliest 10% of attempts (7 of 69)
eve · claude-haiku-4-5-20251001 · as published$0.02 per pass($0.01–$0.02)28% went to the costliest 10% of attempts (7 of 69)15.1k per pass(9.8k–23.4k)43% went to the costliest 10% of attempts (7 of 69)cache split not recorded on 69 attempts12.7s per pass(10.4s–15.3s)26% went to the costliest 10% of attempts (7 of 69)
Hermes · claude-haiku-4-5-20251001 · as published$0.01 per pass($0.0050–$0.01)29% went to the costliest 10% of attempts (7 of 69)21.6k per pass(18k–25.8k)18% went to the costliest 10% of attempts (7 of 69)cache split not recorded on 69 attempts40.1s per pass(35.4s–45.8s)14% went to the costliest 10% of attempts (7 of 69)
opencode · claude-haiku-4-5-20251001 · as published$0.0046 per pass($0.0036–$0.01)32% went to the costliest 10% of attempts (7 of 69)14k per pass(11.8k–16.7k)19% went to the costliest 10% of attempts (7 of 69)cache split not recorded on 69 attempts29.7s per pass(25.5s–35.5s)15% went to the costliest 10% of attempts (7 of 69)
Efficiency and spend per pass can order setups differently: efficiency compares the typical (median) passing run, task by task, while spend per pass averages every attempt, so a few very expensive runs, passing or not, count in full; and spend per pass also counts the attempts that failed or did not finish, and divides by the pass rate. A setup is called the most frugal only where both put it first and both separate it from every other setup.
This benchmark's own board: newest eligible study per setup.
live

No rows on this board yet.

A row appears here the moment a study of this benchmark is published.

The card

Declared data only — nothing here is inferred or scored.

Identity
Category
Knowledge & reasoning
Corpus
69 tasks · v1
Lenses
evals
Graded by
the benchmark's own declared checks
Headline
Pass rate
Protocol
Repeats
1 recommended
Sample floor
100 tasks
Chance anchor
Derived from the pinned corpus's answer formats.
Access and licence
Dataset
open
Task text
available
Licence
Apache-2.0
Catalog
featured
Disclosures
Contamination
No contamination data declared.
Conflict of interest
None declared.

Evidence

The published studies of this benchmark: every run, trajectory and grade, on the studies site.

Published studies of IFEval
1