safety benchmark
AIR-Bench 2024 is a safety benchmark for evaluating policy-grounded refusal across regulatory and policy-derived harm categories.
Updated Sep 5, 2026
Higher score ranks better on this benchmark.
Rank | Model | Score | Percentile | Participants | Evidence | Evaluated |
|---|
| Rank01 | ModelMI | Score88.00% | Percentile100.00% | Participants1 | EvidenceC | Evaluated |
The leading models and scores on this benchmark.
The first five results on this benchmark, with official price and output speed added where the model identity can be matched.
Ranking basisThis air-bench AI model leaderboard uses descending score in the benchmark original unit. The leaderboard ranking keeps matched price and speed data separate from benchmark evidence.
Selection summary
MAI-Thinking-1 currently leads AIR-Bench with 88.00%. 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.
What AIR-Bench measures and how its scores work.
AIR-Bench 2024 is a safety benchmark grounded in risk categories derived from government regulations and company policies.
It measures policy-grounded refusal across a broad regulatory and policy-derived harm taxonomy using category-specific LLM-judge prompts, with results reported as a Score ratio.
Scores are shown in ratio. This benchmark is not independently verified and has an evidence level of B.
LLM Stats. Benchmark scores retain their original unit. Overall score eligibility is shown separately.
Common questions about AIR-Bench.
MAI-Thinking-1 is currently ranked first with 88.00%.
The current leaders are MAI-Thinking-1 (88.00%).
No matched official input price is currently available.
No matched runtime record is currently available.
No. This benchmark measures one defined capability or task. The overall LLMBoard score uses a separate aggregation across eligible benchmark evidence.
It measures policy-grounded refusal across a broad regulatory and policy-derived harm taxonomy using category-specific LLM-judge prompts, with results reported as a Score ratio.
Yes. Higher values rank better for this benchmark.
1 model results are currently shown.
No. This benchmark is shown for reference but does not contribute to the overall score.