MathematicsActive
Trust Score:
90

PutnamBench

Formal theorem-proving on Putnam problems — models write a complete Lean/Isabelle/Coq proof, machine-checked by the proof assistant's kernel.

Launched: Refresh: static
Status Assessment (active):

The wiki's first formal-proving benchmark and, for reasonable budgets, still far from solved. Through most of 2024–2025 the best systems solved single digits of the Lean set (Goedel-Prover 7 at pass@512; GPT-4o ~1). General reasoning models at pass@1 remain low (GPT-5 ReAct ~28–42 of ~660, single digits %). Heavy-compute systems have since climbed steeply — ByteDance's Seed-Prover reportedly ~581/672 Lean at ~10 GPU-days per problem, and in Jan 2026 Logical Intelligence's Aleph CLAIMED 668/672 (99.4%, agentic pass@1) topping the board — but these use enormous or single-source, unreproduced budgets, and the Isabelle/Coq subsets and the harder 'no-answer' variant remain far less attacked. What would move this to nearing-saturation: independent reproduction of high solve rates across languages under disclosed, comparable budgets.

Performance Timeline

Longitudinal progression of model scores against human baselines.

Performance & Historical Trajectory

Empirical score progression across model release dates and evaluation rounds.

Independent Vendor-Reported Human Baseline (1.2%)
ModelScoreDateSource TypeProvenance
Goedel-Prover (Lean, 7/644, pass@512)1.1%2025-02-01independentSource ↗
GPT-4o (paper era, Lean, ~1/640)0.2%2024-07-15independentSource ↗
GPT-5 (Lean, ~42/660, pass@1, ~10-turn ReAct)6.4%2024-06-01independentSource ↗

Human Baseline & Difficulty Horizon

Calibrated human reference points, specialist benchmarks, and ceiling thresholds.
Measured Human Score1.2%Domain Expert Baseline
Baseline Protocol & Interpretation

Median human score among elite collegiate mathematics students on formal theorem proofs in Lean 4.

Metric & Scoring Methodology

Verification protocols, aggregation formulas, and specialized metric variants.
Primary Metric:problems with a complete, kernel-verified formal proof — Lean subset (count / 672)
Scoring Engine:unit-tests

Dataset & Compute Cost

Evaluation volume, public availability, API pricing, and local hardware requirements.
Total Dataset Size672Annotated evaluation items
Public Test SetPublicOpenly mirrored on repositories
Access GatingOpen AccessUnrestricted download
Evaluation LicenseOpen AccessDataset usage and redistribution terms
Frontier API Compute Cost:

$5 – $20 USD for full benchmark evaluation run on frontier APIs.

Recommended Local GPU Setup:

1x NVIDIA RTX 4090 (24GB) or A100 (40GB/80GB) via vLLM / SGLang

Official Dataset & Benchmark Files:Download / View Dataset Repository ↗

How to Run & Reproduce

Standardized evaluation protocols, CLI commands, and reproducible runner templates.
Prompt Regimezero-shot
Reasoning Modedirect
Sampling Temp0
Pass@k Budgetk = 1
Tools & SandboxPure Text
Scoring Verifierunit-tests
Option AEleutherAI LM-Evaluation-Harness (Open-Weight Models)
lm_eval --model hf --model_args pretrained=<model_path> --tasks putnambench --batch_size auto
Option BOpenCompass Evaluation Framework
opencompass --datasets putnambench --models <model_config>
Python APIDeterministic Inference Loop Snippet
# Standard API Evaluation Loop
from openai import OpenAI

client = OpenAI()
response = client.chat.completions.create(
    model="gpt-4o",
    messages=[{"role": "user", "content": prompt}],
    temperature=0.0,
)
Standardized Reporting Requirement:

When publishing results for PutnamBench, always report the exact prompt template, few-shot exemplar ordering, sampling temperature (temperature=0), maximum reasoning budget tokens, and the precise timestamped model snapshot ID.

Contamination & Memorization Analysis

Audit of pretraining exposure risks, memorization vectors, and refresh policies.
Overall Contamination Risk:MEDIUM
Refresh Cadence:

Static fixed snapshot

Test Set Exposure:

Public on web / HuggingFace