Skip to main content
BenchLM
Data

Data as of October 5, 2026 · How the score is built

CurrentWeight access pendingReasoning

Released Oct 5, 2026

Beam

Decision readingBeam is tracked, but not publicly ranked yet. The profile exposes 16 sourced benchmark rows and leaves unsupported fields blank until a published record exists.

Released Oct 5, 2026 — see all recent releases

Decision snapshot

Each value carries a field reference instead of floating alone. Markers compare this model with the current ranked and priced catalog; they are not absolute quality thresholds.

Capability

Unranked

field median 51Not eligible for a public rank

Price

API rate not published

input median $0.95No comparable first-party hosted token rate

Speed

Not measured

field median 90 tok/sTime to first token not measured

Context

Not published

field median 256,000No exact-model context limit is sourced

Strongest published evidence

Published rows are visible, but no category has enough eligible evidence for a comparative rank.

Validate before choosing

16 published rows leave some tracked benchmark slots empty. No comparable first-party API token rate is published.

Source-linked · 16 displayable benchmark rows

Follow model changes

Category score record

Scores and ranks appear only where published evidence can be displayed. The table keeps the score, weight, cohort, and evidence state together.

Category scores, ranks, weighting, benchmark coverage, and evidence status
CategoryScore
AgenticRank Not rankedWeight 22%4 benchmarksVerified
58.7
CodingRank Not rankedWeight 20%7 benchmarksVerified
60.9
ReasoningRank Not rankedWeight 17%1 benchmarkVerified
80.6
MultimodalWeight 12%0 benchmarksNot measured
Not measured
KnowledgeRank Not rankedWeight 12%2 benchmarksVerified
61.7
MultilingualWeight 7%0 benchmarksNot measured
Not measured
Inst. FollowingRank Not rankedWeight 5%1 benchmarkVerified
82.9
MathRank Not rankedWeight 5%1 benchmarkVerified
79.4

16 of 649 tracked benchmark slots have displayable evidence · bars run 0–100

Coverage details

How much of this is verified

Coverage is split by category so a strong number never hides a thin evidence base. Verified means the row is tied to a published source; provisional rows remain visible but separate.

  1. Agentic4/4 verified
  2. Coding7/7 verified
  3. Reasoning1/1 verified
  4. MultimodalNot measured
  5. Knowledge2/2 verified
  6. MultilingualNot measured
  7. Inst. Following1/1 verified
  8. Math1/1 verified
Verified sourceProvisionalNot measured

Benchmark ledger

Coding opens by default. The marker compares each value with the best source-verified result in the catalog; provisional leaders do not set the reference. Expand the remaining categories for every published row.

Coding7 rows
Coding benchmark values, best verified comparison, weight, and source status
SWE-bench ProScore65.5%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Claude Opus 5.5 · 89.9%

Gap24.4 behindWeightDisplay only
DeepSWEScore44.4%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Gemini 4 Argon · 77.9%

Gap33.5 behindWeightDisplay only
SciCodeScientific Code BenchmarkScore49.7%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Sakana Fugu · 60.1%

Gap10.4 behindWeightDisplay only
SWE MultilingualScore78%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Claude Opus 5.5 · 93.9%

Gap15.9 behindWeightDisplay only
Terminal-Bench 2.1Score80.1%Versus best verified row

Best verified: SWE-2 · 92.8%

Gap12.7 behindWeightDisplay only
SWE-Atlas Codebase QnAScore34.6%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Muse Spark 1.3 · 59.4%

Gap24.8 behindWeightDisplay only
SWE-bench VerifiedSoftware Engineering Benchmark VerifiedScore80.9%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Claude Opus 5 · 96%

Gap15.1 behindWeightDisplay only
Agentic4 rows
Agentic benchmark values, best verified comparison, weight, and source status
Terminal-Bench 2.1Score80.1%Versus best verified row

Best verified: SWE-2 · 92.8%

Gap12.7 behindWeightDisplay only
BrowseCompScore77.4%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Atria Dawn Preview · 92.5%

Gap15.1 behindWeightDisplay only
MCP AtlasScore78.7%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Muse Spark 1.1 · 88.1%

Gap9.4 behindWeightDisplay only
DeepSearchQAScore80.1%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Atria Dawn Preview · 96.0%

Gap15.9 behindWeightDisplay only
Reasoning1 row
Reasoning benchmark values, best verified comparison, weight, and source status
LongBench v2Score65.5%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Qwen3.8 Max · 66.3%

Gap0.8 behindWeightDisplay only
Knowledge2 rows
Knowledge benchmark values, best verified comparison, weight, and source status
HLE w/o toolsHumanity's Last Exam without toolsScore36.2%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Claude Opus 5.5 · 64.4%

Gap28.2 behindWeightDisplay only
GPQA-DGPQA DiamondScore90.5%Versus best verified row

Best verified: GPT-6 Astra · 96.0%

Gap5.5 behindWeightDisplay only
Inst. Following1 row
Inst. Following benchmark values, best verified comparison, weight, and source status
IFBenchInstruction Following BenchmarkScore79.7%Versus best verified row

Best verified: MAI-Thinking-1 · 85%

Gap5.3 behindWeightDisplay only
Math1 row
Math benchmark values, best verified comparison, weight, and source status
AIME26AIME 2026Score97.8%Versus best verified row

Best verified: GLM-5.2 · 99.2%

Gap1.4 behindWeightDisplay only

Bars run 0–100; the dark tick marks the best source-verified value

All 16 rows

Lineage

The sequence follows explicit supersedes links. Each score is estimated for that model; a relative can inform a sparse estimate but never sets a floor, so a newer release can score below an earlier one. Scores and prices remain blank when the corresponding public row or first-party rate is unavailable.

  1. Oct 5, 2026 · you are here

    Beam

    Not publicly ranked · Price not listed

preview · Early access

Radar

Beam release history

Full release history
Beam released

Reflection AI · Model release

Source confirmed

Radar confirmed these at the source. Use Beam in your work? Explore Radar to follow supported changes and choose your alerts.

Radar

Spec sheet

Each documented value carries its source. Missing fields stay visible as not sourced or not published, rather than disappearing from the page.

API model ID
Not publishedReflection AI Beam announcement
Context window
Not publishedReflection AI Beam announcement
Maximum output
Not sourced yet
Knowledge cutoff
Not sourced yet
Output modalities
textReflection AI Beam announcement
Parameters
Not sourced yet
Availability
Reflection early-access waitlistReflection AI Beam announcement
Cloud regions
Not tracked yet
API capabilities
Tool calling, structured outputs, and batch support are not tracked yet
Prompt caching
Not documented in the pricing recordReflection AI Beam announcement
Self-host
Weight availability is pending
Rate limits
Not tracked yet

How to read this profile

The visual layer above carries the decisions. These notes preserve the model, ranking, coverage, and family context behind the numbers.

We track Beam, but the public leaderboard excludes this profile until enough non-generated benchmark coverage is available. Only published rows appear above.

Beam has no verified publication yet for weight access. Its context length is not documented in the current profile. The profile records its reasoning mode as reasoning.

Limited early access through Reflection's waitlist. Reflection plans to release weights under Apache 2.0, a technical report, a model card, and developer artifacts later in October 2026; the weights are not yet publicly available. Hosted API pricing and a callable model ID are not published in the announcement.

Reflection's October 5, 2026 launch table reports these exact values for Beam, a text-only sparse MoE with 501B total and 23B active parameters. These are provider-reported preview results; the technical report, model card, and evaluation settings are still pending, so the row remains unranked. SWE-bench Pro v1 stays separate from the v2-Hard result, and Terminal-Bench 2.1 is not mapped to 2.0. The launch reports 1M effective context after continued training and 256K maximum RL rollouts, without a serving limit. No serving context is inferred from those training figures. SWE-bench Pro v2-Hard, AutomationBench public, tau3 banking, and the external-source indices are not mapped to incompatible benchmark keys.

16 of 649 tracked benchmark slots currently have displayable evidence. Missing categories stay blank.

Last updated October 5, 2026. Runtime fields remain blank until a sourced snapshot exists.

Questions

How does Beam perform overall in AI benchmarks?

Beam has 16 source-displayable benchmark rows, but it does not qualify for a public overall rank. The available rows remain visible by category without being converted into a site-wide score. Missing evidence stays blank instead of being estimated from an earlier model.

Is Beam good for knowledge and understanding?

Beam has source-displayable benchmark coverage for knowledge and understanding, but the public category table does not assign it a rank there. The individual rows remain available for inspection. A missing category position means the evidence threshold was not met; it does not convert the model's unmeasured work into a zero.

Is Beam good for coding and programming?

Beam has source-displayable benchmark coverage for coding and programming, but the public category table does not assign it a rank there. The individual rows remain available for inspection. A missing category position means the evidence threshold was not met; it does not convert the model's unmeasured work into a zero.

Is Beam good for mathematics?

Beam has source-displayable benchmark coverage for mathematics, but the public category table does not assign it a rank there. The individual rows remain available for inspection. A missing category position means the evidence threshold was not met; it does not convert the model's unmeasured work into a zero.

Is Beam good for reasoning and logic?

Beam has source-displayable benchmark coverage for reasoning and logic, but the public category table does not assign it a rank there. The individual rows remain available for inspection. A missing category position means the evidence threshold was not met; it does not convert the model's unmeasured work into a zero.

Is Beam good for agentic tool use and computer tasks?

Beam has source-displayable benchmark coverage for agentic tool use and computer tasks, but the public category table does not assign it a rank there. The individual rows remain available for inspection. A missing category position means the evidence threshold was not met; it does not convert the model's unmeasured work into a zero.

Is Beam good for instruction following?

Beam has source-displayable benchmark coverage for instruction following, but the public category table does not assign it a rank there. The individual rows remain available for inspection. A missing category position means the evidence threshold was not met; it does not convert the model's unmeasured work into a zero.

Does Beam have full benchmark coverage on BenchLM?

No. Beam currently has 16 source-displayable rows across 649 tracked benchmark slots. The profile exposes published, non-generated evidence and leaves missing categories blank until an exact evaluation is available. Coverage describes how much was measured; it is not a penalty added to an individual benchmark result.

What is the context window size of Beam?

Beam's provider has not published a context-window limit for this exact model. The profile leaves the value unavailable instead of borrowing a number from an earlier family member or a third-party route. Maximum output length is tracked separately when the provider documents it.

Watch Beam in the weekly brief

Get one weekly email when material rank, price, availability, or benchmark evidence changes are worth revisiting.

Read a sample issue

Join 5,500+ readers.

Compare Beam with every tracked model783 comparisons