RuBench: A Repository-Level Agentic Coding Benchmark with Natively Authored Russian Task Specifications
On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Software engineering coding agents
Abstract (arXiv)
Developers increasingly delegate real maintenance work to product-grade coding agents, and many state tasks in their native language, in the style of a customer request rather than a curated English issue. We introduce RuBench 1.0, a benchmark of 25 tasks mined from recent fix commits in five live open-source repositories (aiohttp, aiogram, Laravel, NestJS, Fastify), each specified natively in Russian -- written from scratch, not translated -- and judged by the upstream maintainer's regression tests, which we withhold from release. All fix commits postdate the training-data cutoffs of every evaluated model. Round 1 evaluates Claude Code with Opus 4.8, Sonnet 5, and Haiku 4.5, and Codex CLI with GPT-5.5 (3 independent runs each; pass@1 with task-level uncertainty); the best configuration resolves 78.7% of tasks. Auditing full trajectories of an hors-concours configuration (Claude Code + Fable 5), we caught the product silently substituting the model on 20% of tasks via an official safeguard fallback -- evidence that the deployed product, not the model, is the unit actually measured. Version 2 adds Round 2: seven further configurations on the same frozen set under a per-configuration freshness gate -- the Russian-market agents SourceCraft CLI (ds, legacy) and Koda CLI (koda-pro), Antigravity with Gemini 3.1 Pro and 3.5 Flash, and Codex CLI with GPT-5.6 Sol and Luna. SourceCraft's flagship resolves 68.1% (N=23), above GPT-5.5 and both Gemini rows. A tool-call contamination re-audit of all 437 Round-2 trajectories finds the Russian and Gemini columns clean (0/293 cells) while flagging systematic oracle-hunting in the GPT-5.6 family (8/69 and 13/75 cells), including one case of mining a prior round's artifacts from the run machine's disk; honest scores are published alongside raw ones. We release statements, metadata, trajectories, and diffs; oracles are withheld with a SHA-256 manifest.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Software engineering coding agents, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 29 of its 34 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 7 Jul 2026.
Builds on
29 of 34 references.
Closest ancestors · 2
Same direction, newest first
- 2025Does SWE-Bench-Verified Test Agent Ability or Model Memory?11 Dec
- 2025SWE-rebench: An Automated Pipeline for Task Collection and Decontaminated Evaluation of Software Engineering Agents26 May
Other references · 27
- 2021Evaluating Large Language Models Trained on Codecited by 8,320
- 2023SWE-bench: Can Language Models Resolve Real-World GitHub Issues?cited by 3,373
- 2024LiveCodeBench: Holistic and Contamination Free Evaluation of Large Language Models for Codecited by 2,004
- 2022Beyond the Imitation Game: Quantifying and extrapolating the capabilities of language modelscited by 1,998
- 2024τ-bench: A Benchmark for Tool-Agent-User Interaction in Real-World Domainscited by 1,402
- 2023GAIA: a benchmark for General AI Assistantscited by 1,128
- 2026Terminal-Bench: Benchmarking Agents on Hard, Realistic Tasks in Command Line Interfacescited by 585
- 2024MLE-bench: Evaluating Machine Learning Agents on Machine Learning Engineeringcited by 469
- 2025SWE-Bench Pro: Can AI Agents Solve Long-Horizon Software Engineering Tasks?cited by 279
- 2024AI Agents That Mattercited by 219
- 2025ARC-AGI-2: A New Challenge for Frontier AI Reasoning Systemscited by 190
- 2024RE-Bench: Evaluating frontier AI R&D capabilities of language model agents against human expertscited by 175
15 more
- 2025Multi-SWE-bench: A Multilingual Benchmark for Issue Resolvingcited by 171
- 2025Measuring AI Ability to Complete Long Software Taskscited by 156
- 2024Adding Error Bars to Evals: A Statistical Approach to Language Model Evaluationscited by 148
- 2024SWE-Bench+: Enhanced Coding Benchmark for LLMscited by 99
- 2025Holistic Agent Leaderboard: The Missing Infrastructure for AI Agent Evaluationcited by 92
- 2022Execution-Based Evaluation for Open-Domain Code Generationcited by 91
- 2024HumanEval-XL: A Multilingual Code Generation Benchmark for Cross-lingual Natural Language Generalizationcited by 86
- 2025The Leaderboard Illusioncited by 66
- 2025The SWE-Bench Illusion: When State-of-the-Art LLMs Remember Instead of Reasoncited by 49
- 2022MCoNaLa: A Benchmark for Code Generation from Multiple Natural Languagescited by 41
- 2025EDIT-Bench: Evaluating LLM Abilities to Perform Real-World Instructed Code Editscited by 13
- 2025SWE-MERA: A Dynamic Benchmark for Agenticly Evaluating Large Language Models on Software Engineering Taskscited by 9
- 2025MERA Code: A Unified Framework for Evaluating Code Generation Across Taskscited by 4
- 2026Chinese Language Is Not More Efficient Than English in Vibe Coding: A Preliminary Study on Token Cost and Problem-Solving Ratecited by 2
- 2026Matching Matters: A Fair Quality-Efficiency Benchmark for Command-Line Agentscited by 2
Built on by
Not cited yet.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2025GitTaskBench: A Benchmark for Code Agents Solving Real-World Tasks Through Code Repository Leveraging
- 2025NL2Repo-Bench: Towards Long-Horizon Repository Generation Evaluation of Coding Agents
- 2026RepoMod-Bench: A Benchmark for Code Repository Modernization via Implementation-Agnostic Testing
- 2026ABC-Bench: Benchmarking Agentic Backend Coding in Real-World Development
- 2026FeatureBench: Benchmarking Agentic Coding for Complex Feature Development
- 2026Harness Engineering for Agentic AI Coding Tools: An Exploratory Study
- 2026E2E-SWE: Benchmarking LLMs on Building Working Codebases from Scratch
- 2026ProjDevBench: Benchmarking AI Coding Agents on End-to-End Project Development