PaperBench: Evaluating AI's Ability to Replicate AI Research
Giulio Starace, Oliver Jaffe, Dane Sherburn, James Aung, Jun Shern Chan, Leon Maksin, Rachel Dias, Evan Mays, Benjamin Kinsella, Wyatt Thompson, Johannes Heidecke, Amelia Glaese, Tejal Patwardhan
arXiv·2025
We introduce PaperBench, a benchmark evaluating the ability of AI agents to
replicate state-of-the-art AI research. Agents must replicate 20 ICML 2024
Spotlight and Oral papers from scratch, including understanding paper
contributions, developing a codebase, and successfully executing experiments.
For objective evaluation, we develop rubrics that hierarchically decompose each
replication task into smaller sub-tasks with clear grading criteria. In total,
PaperBench contains 8,316 individually gradable tasks. Rubrics are co-developed
with the author(s) of each ICML paper for accuracy and realism. To enable
scalable evaluation, we also develop an LLM-based judge to automatically grade
replication attempts against rubrics, and assess our judge's performance by
creating a separate benchmark for judges. We evaluate several frontier models
on PaperBench, finding that the best-performing tested agent, Claude 3.5 Sonnet
(New) with open-source scaffolding, achieves an average replication score of
21.0%. Finally, we recruit top ML PhDs to attempt a subset of PaperBench,
finding that models do not yet outperform the human baseline. We open-source
our code (https://github.com/openai/preparedness) to facilitate future research
in understanding the AI engineering capabilities of AI agents.