HumanEval
A benchmark of 164 Python coding problems where correctness is unambiguous—the standard for measuring code generation.
Think of it like
Like a programming interview where either your code runs and passes tests, or it doesn't.
Example
Problem: 'Write a function that returns the nth Fibonacci number.' The model generates code; you run it against test cases.
How it actually works
HumanEval is small but hard. Most frontier models score 80–95%. It's valuable because code correctness is verifiable and unambiguous. Downside: it's only Python, only small problems, and overfitting is a risk (the dataset is public and finite). Pass@k is often reported alongside exact-match to show how many attempts the model needs.
For product teams
HumanEval is the quickest way to compare code generation capability. High HumanEval correlates with ability to write real code.
For engineers
Report both pass@1 and pass@10; compare to human baseline (humans get ~80% at pass@1).
Related
Read anything AI without the jargon
Look up any term in plain English, or save terms as you read with the free Chrome extension.
Open DecoderAdd to Chrome