llmboard.aiAI model intelligence
Home

Model Rankings

OverallOpen ModelsAgentCodingReasoningMathKnowledgeInstruction FollowingTextVision
Image GenerationImage Editing
Video GenerationImage to VideoVideo Editing
Text to SpeechSpeech to Text
Embeddings

Efficiency

Chat Token PricingImage PricingVideo PricingAudio Pricing
Chat Speed & LatencyProvider Reliability

Benchmarks

GPQAMMLU-ProAIME 2025SWE-Bench VerifiedMMLUHumanity's Last ExamLiveCodeBenchMATHHumanEvalMMMU-Pro
All Benchmarks

Tools

Model DirectoryCompare Models

Scoring & Data

Scoring & Data
393 models668 benchmarks

Leaderboard Center

Overall RankingCodingCore BenchmarksPrice & ValueRuntime Performance

Modalities

All ModelsImage GenerationImage EditingVideo GenerationImage-to-VideoVideo EditingText-to-SpeechSpeech-to-TextEmbeddings

Data & Methods

Scoring MethodAll BenchmarksReasoningMath

Vendors

All VendorsOpenAIAnthropicGoogle
llmboard.aiCopyright 2026 llmboard.ai

physics benchmark

CMT-Benchmark Leaderboard

CMT-Benchmark evaluates models on condensed matter theory problems, testing advanced physics reasoning across areas such as many-body systems, quantum field theory, and statistical mechanics.

Updated Aug 17, 2026

Models1
Model coverage1
MetricScore
EvidenceB

On this page

  • Ranking
  • Highlights
  • Top models
  • About
  • FAQ

CMT-Benchmark Ranking

Higher score ranks better on this benchmark.

1 rows
Columns

Show columns

Sort by
Rank
Model
Score
Percentile
Participants
Evidence
Evaluated
Rank01ModelTEHy3TencentScore37.9%Percentile100.0%Participants1EvidenceCEvaluatedAug 17, 2026

CMT-Benchmark Highlights

The leading models and scores on this benchmark.

Rank #1Hy337.9%

The Top AI Models for CMT-Benchmark

The first five results on this benchmark, with official price and output speed added where the model identity can be matched.

Ranking basisThis cmt-benchmark AI model leaderboard uses descending score in the benchmark's original unit. The leaderboard ranking keeps matched price and speed data separate from benchmark evidence.

  1. 01
    TE
    Hy3Tencent
    Score
    37.9%

    Strengths

    • Ranks #1 of 1 compared models
    • 100th percentile on this benchmark
    • C evidence result

    Considerations

    • This result measures CMT-Benchmark, not total model capability

Selection summary

Best AI Models for CMT-Benchmark

Hy3 currently leads CMT-Benchmark with 37.9%. It is the top model on this specific benchmark, while the best LLM for the broader task should also be checked against other benchmarks, price and runtime.

Use this leaderboard with the supporting benchmark results and coverage details above. A leaderboard position summarizes the selected ranking signal; it does not replace workload-specific testing.

Benchmark rank #1Hy337.9%

What is CMT-Benchmark?

What CMT-Benchmark measures and how its scores work.

CMT-Benchmark evaluates models on condensed matter theory problems, testing advanced physics reasoning across areas such as many-body systems, quantum field theory, and statistical mechanics.

Scores are shown in ratio. This benchmark is not independently verified and has an evidence level of B.

Family
CMT-Benchmark
Modality
text
Primary category
physics
Score direction
higher
LLMBoard eligible
No
Evaluation key
cmt-benchmark|llm-stats-current

Benchmark scores retain their original unit. Overall score eligibility is shown separately.

FAQ

Common questions about CMT-Benchmark.

Which model scores highest on CMT-Benchmark?

Hy3 is currently ranked first with 37.9%.

What does CMT-Benchmark measure?

CMT-Benchmark evaluates models on condensed matter theory problems, testing advanced physics reasoning across areas such as many-body systems, quantum field theory, and statistical mechanics.

Is a higher score better?

Yes. Higher values rank better for this benchmark.

How many models are compared?

1 model results are currently shown.

Does this benchmark affect the overall score?

No. This benchmark is shown for reference but does not contribute to the overall score.