Step 3.7 Flash
Explore Step 3.7 Flash’s published benchmark results and provider offerings below. More comparable task results are needed to describe its strongest areas.
Updated: Data as of:
Strongest results
| Benchmark | Measures | Score |
|---|---|---|
| Humanity's Last Exam ↗Stable HLE — text-only subset | Expert reasoning | 21.4%#58 of 68 |
Model details
| Model | Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|
| Agent Index v1.2 | Insufficient coverage (0/7) · Preview |
| Creator | StepFun (opens in a new tab) |
| Availability | Open source / open weights |
| Context size | Not reported |
| Max output | Not reported |
| Knowledge cutoff | Not reported |
| License | Not reported · Model weights ↗ (opens in a new tab) |
Pricing and performance
Per provider and reported configuration. Prices are USD per 1M tokens.
No provider pricing or performance reports have been added for this model yet.
Reported benchmarks
All published results in our dataset, with versions, evaluation settings, and sources.
| Benchmark | Score | Evaluation setup | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| Humanity's Last ExamStable HLE — text-only subsetAccuracy · Higher is better | 21.4% | question count: 2158 · reported precision decimals: 1 · Step 3.7 Flash; original HLE; 2,158 text-only questions; no tools; pass@1; chart labels rounded to one decimal. · source model href: /models/step-3-7-flash · subset: text · No tools | Artificial Analysis (opens in a new tab)independent |
| π-BenchOverall · PROCProactivity (PROC) · Higher is better | 63.8% | completeness score: 62.3 · completeness uncertainty: 0.8 · metric: Avg PROC · personas: 5 · proc uncertainty: 1.3 · selection: Overall rows; not per-persona averages. COMP is a separate metric and does not determine this ranking. · tasks: 100 | π-Bench research team ↗ (opens in a new tab)benchmark publisher |