MapSatisfyBench - Implicit Intent Satisfaction: leaderboard

MapSatisfyBench (2026) gives map-service agents informal, underspecified requests rebuilt from real user behavior and checks whether they recover the unstated needs through 22 replayed map tools and a simulated user, with GPT-5.3 as judge. This board is the evidence-weighted satisfaction of the unstated decision factors in percent; higher is better.

Metric: Implicit-intent satisfaction rate (%): evidence-weighted satisfaction of the unstated decision factors (hard constraints binary, soft preferences graded); underspecified map-service requests rebuilt from real anonymized user behavior chains, answered by a ReAct agent with 22 deterministic replayed map tools and a simulated user; GPT-5.3 simulates the user and judges (majority of three judgments), temperature 1; higher is better. Source: arxiv.org. Saturation forecast: Around February 2027. 15 models tracked.

Top models

#ModelScoreOverall rank
1Claude Opus 4.671.7#102
2DeepSeek V4 Pro (Non-reasoning)70.17#188 (DeepSeek V4 Pro)
3Qwen 3.6 Plus (Thinking)67.83#222 (Qwen 3.6 Plus)
4Claude Sonnet 4.667.25#161
5DeepSeek V3.2 (Non-reasoning)66.1#406 (DeepSeek V3.2)
6Qwen 3.6 Plus (Non-reasoning)65.85#222 (Qwen 3.6 Plus)
7Gemini 3.1 Pro (Preview) (Thinking)64.69#94 (Gemini 3.1 Pro (Preview))
8Qwen 3 235B A22B (Non-reasoning)62.37#623 (Qwen 3 235B A22B)
9GPT-4.161.04#495
10Qwen 3 8B (Non-reasoning)37.16#1830 (Qwen 3 8B)
11Qwen 3 30B A3B (Non-reasoning)36.35#1122 (Qwen 3 30B A3B)

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

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