Summary
METR blogpost | X | Github
In the paper Measuring AI Ability to Complete Long Software Tasks (Kwa & West et al. 2025), METR defined an AI model’s 50% time horizon as the length of tasks (measured by how long they take human professionals) that it can complete autonomously with 50% probability. We estimated the time horizon of frontier models released since 2019 on a benchmark combining three sets of software and research tasks ranging from 1 second to 16 hours in length-for-humans (HCAST, RE-Bench, and SWAA, henceforth METR-HRS). METR found that the time horizon has doubled every 7 months, possibly accelerating to every 4 months in 2024.
One important limitation was the task domain: all involved software engineering or research, but AI capabilities are known to vary greatly between different task types.[1] Here we explore whether similar trends apply to different task distributions including self-driving and agentic computer use, using a methodology that can estimate time horizons with less granular data. The data for many of these benchmarks are less robust than in the original paper, and any individual benchmark’s result should be treated as fairly noisy, but in aggregate, they point towards a similar trend.
Each line represents the trend in time horizon for one benchmark smoothed spline with s=0.2, k=1. Lines have a range on the y-axis equal to the range of task lengths actually in the benchmark (2nd% to 98th% quantiles).
Software and reasoning domains like scientific QA (GPQA), math contests (MATH, Mock AIME), semi-realistic software (METR-HRS), and competitive programming (LiveCodeBench) all have 50-200+ minute horizons which are currently doubling every 2-6 months, so the ~100 minute time horizons and ~4 month doubling times seen on METR-HRS in the original paper are likely not an outlier. Visual computer use (OSWorld, WebArena) time horizons are 40-100x shorter than the software and reasoning cluster but are increasing at similar rates. Self-drivin