GDP.pdf mean criteria pass rate without tools (GDP.pdf (no tools))
We show this table for reference; we do not rank on it.
Professional document understanding over 100 real-world PDFs from ten domains.
Benchmark score on GDP.pdf (no tools) — November 13, 2026
We compile the GDP.pdf (no tools) rows from provider self-reports. Claude Fable 5.1 leads the table at 85.4%, followed by Claude Opus 5 (83.4%) and dots3-note Preview (60.7%). We do not use these results to rank models overall.
Claude Fable 5.1
Anthropic
Reported by AnthropicClaude Opus 5
Anthropic
Reported by Anthropicdots3-note Preview
Dots Studio
Reported by Dots Studio3 modelsMultimodal & GroundedCurrentDisplay onlyUpdated November 13, 2026
Benchmark score table (3 models)
All 3 results on this page were reported by the labs that built the models.
| Rank | Model / configuration | Score | Who ran it | Parameters (B) | Open / closed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Claude Fable 5.1AnthropicReported by Anthropic | 85.4% | Reported by Anthropic | Not reported | Closed |
| 2 | Claude Opus 5AnthropicReported by Anthropic | 83.4% | Reported by Anthropic | Not reported | Closed |
| 3 | dots3-note PreviewDots StudioReported by Dots Studio | 60.7% | Reported by Dots Studio | Not reported | Open |
- Lab-reported
- Benchmark-run
- Independent
Among the reported GDP.pdf (no tools) rows, Claude Fable 5.1 is first at 85.4%. The third row is 24.7 points behind. The broader top-10 range is 24.7 points, so the table still separates the published systems.
3 models have been evaluated on GDP.pdf (no tools). The benchmark falls in the Multimodal & Grounded category. GDP.pdf (no tools) is currently displayed for reference but excluded from the scoring formula, so it does not directly affect overall rankings.
About GDP.pdf (no tools)
Year
2026
Tasks
100 professional document prompts
Format
Mean criteria pass rate
Difficulty
Professional document reasoning
Section 8.12.4 reports a five-run mean criteria pass rate from Anthropic's corrected internal harness without tools, using Opus 4.7 as judge.
Freshness and provenance
Version
GDP.pdf (no tools) 2026
Refresh cadence
Quarterly
Staleness state
Current
Question availability
Public benchmark set
BenchLM uses freshness metadata to decide whether a benchmark should still be treated as a strong differentiator, a benchmark to watch, or a display-only reference. For the full scoring policy, see the BenchLM methodology page.
Questions
What does GDP.pdf (no tools) measure?
Professional document understanding over 100 real-world PDFs from ten domains.
Which model scores highest on GDP.pdf (no tools)?
Claude Fable 5.1 by Anthropic currently leads with a score of 85.4% on GDP.pdf (no tools).
How many models are evaluated on GDP.pdf (no tools)?
3 AI models have published results on GDP.pdf (no tools) in the BenchLM catalog.
Compare top models on GDP.pdf (no tools)
Know when it’s worth switching models
The model to choose, the cheaper alternative, and the release we would wait on.
Read a sample issueJoin 7,000+ subscribers.
One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.