Olivia Watkins of OpenAI's Frontier Evals team explains the human verification process behind creating the SWE-bench Verified benchmark from Princeton's original SWE-bench dataset.
Opinion
Watkins: SWE-bench Verified is saturated, contaminated, and should be retired
“SweetBenchVerified has been one of the Northstar coding benchmarks that the field has looked at to measure coding progress. But recently we've seen that progress has kind of stalled and this, we realized that this is because the eval is effectively saturated a…”
Assertion Supported
Watkins: Over half of SWE-bench problems investigated by OpenAI had test flaws
“In over half of the problems that were investigated in that deep dive, there was one problem or the other. I think the most common problem are, like, overly narrow tests where there's some particular implementation detail that the tests were looking for but wa…”
Assertion Not checkable as stated
Watkins: SWE-bench Verified is contaminated across OpenAI, Claude, and Gemini models
“And in SweetBenchVerified, we found many instances of contamination across like, across OpenEye models, across, like, Quad Opus, 4.5, Gemini Flash, and all of these, we saw things like regurgitating the ground truth solutions, things like in some cases giving,…”
Assertion Supported
Watkins: About 90% of SWE-bench Verified tasks take under an hour
“For Sweep Edge Verified I think that's something like, 90% of the problems are things that were estimated to take, like, an expert software engineer like, less than an hour.”
Disclosure
Watkins: OpenAI will probably not release proprietary AI research coding benchmarks
“Because a lot of the, like, you know, state-of-the-art AI code bases are proprietary. So if we make evals for that, like, we're probably not gonna release them. And it's harder for people in the field to make evals that kind of measure, like, is this a realist…”