Large Language Models (LLMs) applied to code-related applications have emerged as a prominent field, attracting significant interest from academia and industry. However, as new and improved LLMs are developed, existing evaluation benchmarks (e.g., HumanEvla, MBPP) are no longer sufficient for assessing their capabilities suffering from data contamination, overfitting, saturation, and focus on merely code generation. In this work, we propose LiveCodeBench, a comprehensive and contamination-free evaluation of LLMs for code, which collects new problems over time from contests across three competition platforms, Leetcode, Atcoder, and Codeforces. Notably, our benchmark also focuses on a broader range of code-related capabilities, such as self-repair, code execution, and test output prediction, beyond just code generation. Currently, LiveCodeBench hosts over six hundred coding problems that were published between May 2023 and Aug 2024. We evaluate over 50 LLMs on LiveCodeBench (LCB for brevity) presenting the largest evaluation study of code LLMs on competition problems. Based on the study, we present novel empirical findings on contamination, overfitting, and holistic evaluations. We demonstrate that time-segmented evaluations serve as a robust approach to evade contamination; they are successful at detecting contamination across a wide range of open and closed models including GPT-4O, Claude, Deepseek, and Codestral. Next, we highlight overfitting and saturation of traditional coding benchmarks like HumanEvla and demonstrate LCB allows more reliable evaluations. Finally, our holistic evaluation scenarios allow for measuring the different capabilities of programming agents in isolation.

Function calling, also called tool use, refers to an LLM’s ability to invoke external functions, APIs, or user-defined tools in response to user queries—an essential capability for agentic LLM applications. Despite its prominence, there did not exist a standard benchmark to evaluate function calling abilities, due to two reasons – the challenging nature of evaluating when a function call is valid, and the challenge of acquiring diverse, real-world functions. We present the Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL), a comprehensive benchmark designed to evaluate function calling capabilities in a wide range of real-world settings. The BFCL benchmark evaluates serial and parallel function calls, across various programming languages using a novel Abstract Syntax Tree (AST) evaluation method that can easily scale to thousands of functions. We construct the benchmark using a combination of expert curated, and user-contributed functions and associated prompts. Finally, BFCL benchmark evaluates the ability of models to abstain and reason in stateful multi-step agentic setting. Evaluating a wide range of models, we observe that while state-of-the-art LLMs excel at singleturn calls, memory, dynamic decision-making, and long-horizon reasoning remain open challenges. Since its preview, BFCL has become the defacto standard for evaluating function-calls, and can be accessed at gorilla.cs.berkeley.edu/leaderboard.html.