Qwen3.7-Plus
Made by Alibaba, released 2 Jun 2026. Epoch AI lists its access as “API access”. No Top tier or Strong results yet among the models listed here.
In short
What it does well
No Top tier or Strong ratings on the four main tests yet.
Where it falls short
- Maths: Behind the leaders (38th of 43 listed models)
- Coding: Middle (48th of 77 listed models)
- Writing: Middle (40th of 77 listed models)
What we don't know yet
- Web-building votes: Not enough data
- Short factual questions: Not enough data
- Fixing real software bugs: Not enough data
The four ratings
- Top tier
- Strong
- Middle
- Behind the leaders
- Not enough data
Ratings compare only the 77 models listed here, in quarters, best first. “Not enough data” means no result yet. It is never a low score.
- Writing
- MiddleHow often people preferred its answers to writing prompts. 1,438 on Arena's scale · Source for Qwen3.7-Plus writing score (lmarena)
- Coding
- MiddleHow often people preferred its answers to coding questions. 1,473 on Arena's scale · Source for Qwen3.7-Plus coding score (lmarena)
- Maths
- Behind the leadersHow many very hard maths problems it solved. 34.4% · Source for Qwen3.7-Plus maths score (epoch)
- Knowledge
- Not enough dataNo result yet for short factual questions.
Evidence completeness: Broad evidence, 10 of 13 tests have a result.
Where it is relatively stronger or weaker
This compares each kind of request with the model's own overall position among the 77 listed models, using Arena's votes. It is about performance on different languages, kinds of request and topics, not about political or social bias.
Relatively stronger
No category stands out as clearly stronger than its overall position.
Relatively weaker
- Japanese: 40th of 54 on questions asked in Japanese, against 40th of 77 overall. Source for Japanese
Show every category we can see
| Category | Position | Arena score | Votes | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Expert-level prompts Kind of request | 48th of 77 | 1,466 95% range 1,457 to 1,475 | 4,723 | Source for Expert-level prompts |
| Hard prompts Kind of request | 47th of 77 | 1,460 95% range 1,455 to 1,464 | 28,284 | Source for Hard prompts |
| Long prompts Kind of request | 47th of 77 | 1,454 95% range 1,448 to 1,460 | 19,524 | Source for Long prompts |
| Longer conversations Kind of request | 40th of 77 | 1,459 95% range 1,452 to 1,467 | 7,006 | Source for Longer conversations |
| Chinese Language | 34th of 76 | 1,510 95% range 1,498 to 1,521 | 2,646 | Source for Chinese |
| English prompts Language | 41st of 77 | 1,459 95% range 1,453 to 1,464 | 17,706 | Source for English prompts |
| French Language | 41st of 72 | 1,471 95% range 1,455 to 1,487 | 1,606 | Source for French |
| German Language | 23rd of 55 | 1,470 95% range 1,448 to 1,492 | 758 | Source for German |
| Japanese Language | 40th of 54 | 1,412 95% range 1,388 to 1,436 | 680 | Source for Japanese |
| Korean Language | 37th of 54 | 1,413 95% range 1,392 to 1,434 | 829 | Source for Korean |
| Non-English prompts Language | 39th of 77 | 1,445 95% range 1,440 to 1,450 | 24,303 | Source for Non-English prompts |
| Russian Language | 37th of 77 | 1,458 95% range 1,449 to 1,467 | 4,651 | Source for Russian |
| Spanish Language | 37th of 70 | 1,456 95% range 1,439 to 1,474 | 1,238 | Source for Spanish |
| Entertainment, sport and media Topic | 51st of 77 | 1,421 95% range 1,415 to 1,428 | 9,992 | Source for Entertainment, sport and media |
| Law and government Topic | 53rd of 76 | 1,452 95% range 1,441 to 1,462 | 3,558 | Source for Law and government |
| Medicine and health Topic | 36th of 75 | 1,465 95% range 1,454 to 1,476 | 2,972 | Source for Medicine and health |
| Science Topic | 43rd of 77 | 1,464 95% range 1,456 to 1,472 | 6,748 | Source for Science |
| Software and IT Topic | 46th of 77 | 1,473 95% range 1,467 to 1,479 | 17,157 | Source for Software and IT |
Bias: what we can and can't see
Our sources do not measure political lean, stereotyping, flattery (agreeing with you too readily) or safety behaviour, so we cannot say how any model does on those. What we can show is above: where a model is relatively stronger or weaker across languages, kinds of request and topics. Also, people voting in Arena can favour answer style, such as length and formatting, and our numbers do not adjust for that. See what AI bias means and what these tests can tell you.
Best-supported use cases
- Research and checking facts: not ranked, because there is not enough data for the main test.
Where an alternative might be more suitable
- Writing and creating content: rated Middle on writing votes. Compare it with Claude Opus 5.5, the best-supported choice for this task.
- Coding and building things: rated Middle on coding votes. Compare it with Claude Opus 5.5, the best-supported choice for this task.
- Homework and maths: rated Behind the leaders on hard maths problems. Compare it with GPT-6.1 Sol, the best-supported choice for this task.
- Business emails and everyday work: rated Middle on business-task votes. Compare it with Gemini 4 Argon, the best-supported choice for this task.
- Research and checking facts: no result on short factual questions, so we cannot say. See which models the evidence does support.
What it is
- Maker
- Alibaba
- Release date (Epoch AI)
- 2 Jun 2026
- Access, as listed by Epoch AI
- API access
- Licence, as listed by Arena
- Proprietary
- Maker's country (Epoch AI)
- China
- Last observation in our data
- 28 Oct 2026
- Data last changed
- 29 Oct 2026, 14:36 UTC
We have not verified an official product page for this model, so we do not link to one.
How you can use it
Proprietary. The model's files are not published, so it is generally available only through its maker or partners the maker chooses.
How you can reach it (an app, a website, a developer API or a third-party tool) and what that costs are not covered by our benchmark data. Where we could verify prices from the maker's own pages, they are shown under Price. Epoch AI lists access as “API access”. See models, apps and harnesses and how AI pricing works.
Price
Price not independently verified
We have not been able to check this maker's own pricing page, so we show nothing for it.
We never infer subscription prices from API prices. New to “tokens” and “per million”? See how AI pricing works.
Good to remember
- Benchmarks are samples of tasks. None proves performance in every situation.
- Arena scores come from people choosing between answers. That measures preference, not correctness.
- Ratings are relative to the 77 models listed here. A different set would change them.
- Sources test models at different settings. Each result shows the setting used, and we do not adjust it.
The evidence, for the curious
Show all 13 tests with settings and sources
| Test | Result | Rating | Setting used | Source identifier | Observed | Links |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Arena text: overall preference Arena 'text' leaderboard (Bradley-Terry rating, no style control) |
1,455 Arena score 95% range 1,450 to 1,459, 42,011 votes |
Middle | effort: not stated, bradley-terry rating | Qwen3.7-Plus lmarena · text/latest |
28 Oct 2026 | Source for Qwen3.7-Plus Arena text: overall preference score (lmarena) |
| Arena text: creative writing Arena 'text' leaderboard, category creative_writing |
1,438 Arena score 95% range 1,430 to 1,445, 7,794 votes |
Middle | effort: not stated, bradley-terry rating | Qwen3.7-Plus lmarena · text/latest |
28 Oct 2026 | Source for Qwen3.7-Plus Arena text: creative writing score (lmarena) |
| Arena text: coding Arena 'text' leaderboard, category coding |
1,473 Arena score 95% range 1,466 to 1,479, 12,194 votes |
Middle | effort: not stated, bradley-terry rating | Qwen3.7-Plus lmarena · text/latest |
28 Oct 2026 | Source for Qwen3.7-Plus Arena text: coding score (lmarena) |
| Arena text: maths Arena 'text' leaderboard, category math |
1,467 Arena score 95% range 1,454 to 1,481, 1,909 votes |
Middle | effort: not stated, bradley-terry rating | Qwen3.7-Plus lmarena · text/latest |
28 Oct 2026 | Source for Qwen3.7-Plus Arena text: maths score (lmarena) |
| Arena text: following instructions Arena 'text' leaderboard, category instruction_following |
1,440 Arena score 95% range 1,434 to 1,445, 15,013 votes |
Middle | effort: not stated, bradley-terry rating | Qwen3.7-Plus lmarena · text/latest |
28 Oct 2026 | Source for Qwen3.7-Plus Arena text: following instructions score (lmarena) |
| Arena text: business and management Arena 'text' leaderboard, category industry_business_and_management_and_financial_operations |
1,435 Arena score 95% range 1,427 to 1,442, 8,377 votes |
Middle | effort: not stated, bradley-terry rating | Qwen3.7-Plus lmarena · text/latest |
28 Oct 2026 | Source for Qwen3.7-Plus Arena text: business and management score (lmarena) |
| Arena WebDev: building web apps | Not enough data | |||||
| FrontierMath Tiers 1-3 (v2) FrontierMath Tiers 1-3 v2 (private set), benchmark released 2026-06-12 |
34.4% share of problems solved standard error ±2.8 points |
Behind the leaders | effort: none, best score across scorers | qwen3.7-plus_none epoch · frontiermath_tiers_1_3_v2.csv |
29 Aug 2026 | Source for Qwen3.7-Plus FrontierMath Tiers 1-3 (v2) score (epoch) · Run details for FrontierMath Tiers 1-3 (v2) |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025, benchmark released 2024-12-19 |
80.0% share of problems solved standard error ±6.0 points |
Behind the leaders | effort: none, best score across scorers | qwen3.7-plus_none epoch · otis_mock_aime_2024_2025.csv |
7 Aug 2026 | Source for Qwen3.7-Plus OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 score (epoch) · Run details for OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 |
| GPQA Diamond GPQA Diamond, benchmark released 2023-11-20 |
81.8% share of questions correct standard error ±2.7 points |
Behind the leaders | effort: none, best score across scorers | qwen3.7-plus_none epoch · gpqa_diamond.csv |
7 Aug 2026 | Source for Qwen3.7-Plus GPQA Diamond score (epoch) · Run details for GPQA Diamond |
| SimpleQA Verified | Not enough data | |||||
| SWE-bench Verified (Epoch runs) | Not enough data | |||||
| FrontierCode (reported by Cognition) FrontierCode, benchmark released 2026-06-08, aggregation Mean@5 |
10.2% mean score over 5 attempts no uncertainty figure published |
Not rated (results use different tools) | effort: none, tool: mini-swe-agent, mean@5 | qwen3.7-plus epoch · frontiercode_external.csv |
not provided | Source for Qwen3.7-Plus FrontierCode (reported by Cognition) score (epoch) · Run details for FrontierCode (reported by Cognition) |
Missing evidence
Not enough data for these tests:
- Arena WebDev: building web apps
- SimpleQA Verified
- SWE-bench Verified (Epoch runs)
Missing results are not low scores and do not count against the model.
Where a source gives no public run log, we cannot show the run behind the score. See data sources.
Not sure this is the right one?
Tell us what you need help with and we'll narrow the options down.