We evaluate whether AI agents can match the reported findings of published biomedical studies using public data. Existing evaluations do not consistently separate analysis from prior knowledge or retrieval of the published answer.

We introduce BioStudyBench, a benchmark of 25 long-horizon analysis tasks drawn from studies first published between July and September 2026, after the developer-reported knowledge cutoffs of the models we evaluate, semi-automatically filtered down from 404,019 PubMed records. In each task, the agent receives a neutral research question but no data files, so it must find and download the relevant public data, search the literature through tools that return only records dated before its cutoff, and report findings through data analysis.

To measure gains over prior knowledge, we run every task both with and without access to data and tools. Across eight models, access to data and tools raises the pass rate by 47 percentage points on average over the no-data baseline.

Open-weight models across sizes trail closed-weight models, with the best open-weight model passing 81.3% of tasks against 94.7% for the best closed-weight model.