AI Scientists' Last Exam

A benchmark for evaluating AI scientists on experimental tasks.

4,079Physical experiments
02Laboratories
07Models evaluated
04Task categories

AISLE includes physical experiments and simulated tasks.

AISLE · 7 models
#ModelOverallCategory contributions
0255075100

Equal category weights. Select a category above or a model for details.

Detailed scores

Category scores

Study scores from 0 to 100. Rank refers to the aggregate score.
RankModelOverall / 100OptimizationSafetyRobustnessMultimodal
01OpenAI 44.7325.9533.3374.9233.86
02Z.ai 32.2723.804.4468.57N/A
03Qwen 31.9126.134.4465.1617.71
04Anthropic 23.9110.278.8952.5825.27
05Google 19.2528.470.0029.2820.42
06DeepSeek 17.0513.830.0037.32N/A
07Moonshot AI 13.917.000.0034.7322.62

Overall averages optimization, safety and robustness. Multimodal is shown separately; N/A means not evaluated.

AISLE

Task Breakdown

Physical + simulated

Colour matching

Optimize formulations using experimental feedback.

Tasks
4-component and 8-component colour matching
Decisions
Formulation volumes; use of prior observations
Budget
12 scored experiments per run
Evidence
Colour error, attainment, efficiency and repeat stability
Task details

Category ranking

Score / 100
  1. 1Gemini logoGemini 3.1 Pro Preview28.47
  2. 2Qwen logoQwen 3.6 Plus26.13
  3. 3GPT logoGPT 5.525.95
  4. 4GLM logoGLM 5.123.80
  5. 5DeepSeek logoDeepSeek V4 Pro13.83
  6. 6Claude logoClaude Sonnet 4.610.27
  7. 7Kimi logoKimi K2.67.00

Scores are aggregated within this category. N/A = not evaluated.

Institutions

Academic Institutions

  • Suzhou National Laboratory
  • USTC
  • BEARS
  • UNSW Sydney
  • EPFL
  • Central South University
  • Shenzhen University
  • Nanyang Technological University
  • UC Berkeley
  • University of Toronto

Industry

  • GreenDynamics