EvoBrowseComp-ZH: leaderboard

The Chinese half of EvoBrowseComp (2026): 400 multi-hop questions built from fresh live-web knowledge that resists parametric recall, answered by search agents with web tools. Scored by LLM-judged accuracy; higher is better.

Metric: Accuracy (%) on the 400 Chinese EvoBrowseComp questions (complex multi-hop questions synthesized from fresh live-web knowledge to resist parametric recall), search agent with web search and page visit tools (Tongyi DeepResearch tool definitions), answers judged correct against the reference by a GLM-5-Chat judge; temperature 0.6, top_p 0.95, 128K context, at most 40 tool calls; higher is better. Source: arxiv.org. Saturation forecast: Around February 2028. 14 models tracked.

Top models

#ModelScoreOverall rank
1Claude Opus 4.8 (Max)38.3#56 (Claude Opus 4.8)
2Claude Opus 4.6 (Max)36.8#102 (Claude Opus 4.6)
3Qwen 3.5 397B A17B34.5#246
4GLM-530.5#260
5DeepSeek V3.2 (Thinking)30.5#406 (DeepSeek V3.2)
6DeepSeek V4 Flash (High)24.8#258 (DeepSeek V4 Flash)
7Qwen 3.5 122B A10B21#331
8DeepSeek V4 Flash (Non-reasoning)20#258 (DeepSeek V4 Flash)
9Kimi K2.619.8#178
10Qwen 3.5 27B18.6#359
11Qwen 3 235B A22B 2507 (Thinking)17.5#463
12DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)15#188 (DeepSeek V4 Pro)
13Qwen 3.5 35B A3B14.2#482
14DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)10.8#258 (DeepSeek V4 Flash)

No result here: #1 Claude Fable 5.2, #2 Gemini 4 Carbon, #5 Claude Opus 5.5.

Interactive version: theaggregate.ai/benchmark?slug=evobrowsecomp-zh · How It Works · Data refreshed daily, snapshot 2026-11-13.