SCHEDBench (Full-Variation): leaderboard

SCHEDBench (2026) verbalizes canonical job-shop, project-scheduling, nurse-rostering and timetabling instances as natural-language problems and checks whether large language models produce constraint-feasible schedules. Feasibility is the share of instances whose output satisfies all hard constraints under an exact OR-Tools verifier, in percent, higher is better, on the full surface-form rendering with themed names, paraphrased templates and reordered constraints.

Metric: Feasibility rate (%; share of SCHEDBench natural-language scheduling instances whose model output satisfies all hard constraints, verified by OR-Tools CP-SAT; six canonical job-shop, project-scheduling, nurse-rostering and timetabling families; greedy decoding, zero-shot, no external solver; all three surface-form axes (themed names, paraphrased templates, constraint reordering) active). Source: arxiv.org. Saturation forecast: Around February 2027. 13 models tracked.

Top models

#ModelScoreOverall rank
1GPT-5.5 (2026-04-23)55.9#33
2Gemini 3 Flash (Preview)29.5#141
3Qwen 3.5 27B25#358
4Qwen 3.5 397B A17B24.3#242
5Qwen 3.5 122B A10B14.3#329
6Claude Sonnet 4.612.8#158
7Claude Opus 4.68.9#100
8Claude Haiku 4.54.9#568
9Llama 3.3 70B4.9#1511
10Llama 4 Maverick4.5#1105
11GPT-5.4 Mini (2026-03-17)4.3#285
12Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite3.9#363
13GPT-5.4 (2026-03-05)3.7#84

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

Interactive version: theaggregate.ai/benchmark?slug=schedbench-full-variation · How It Works · Data refreshed daily, snapshot 2026-11-12.