DuelLabGameBench 2
Menu

Model results · Alibaba

Qwen3.7 Plus

No Overall rank: results for 2 of 3 reasoning settings. Intensive not supported.

Score · relative 0–100
25.6
Rank
—
Status
Provisional
Players generated
2026-07-02 – 2026-07-03
Match evidence updated
2026-10-26
Results published
Compare in charts View player programs Back to leaderboard

Scores by reasoning setting

  • Enabled (Balanced group, tested and included)33.0
  • None (Baseline group, tested and included)18.3

Every tested setting is included in the overall score.

Available settings and grouping

Available settings

Reasoning disabledReasoning enabled

Checked on 2026-07-21 · Provider documentation

How settings are grouped

  • Baseline: Reasoning disabled — tested and included
  • Balanced: Reasoning enabled — tested and included
  • Intensive: Not available for this model

Scores by game

  • Go1 of 3 failed30.2
  • Chess40.8
  • Shogi2 of 2 failed0.0
  • Xiangqi1 of 2 failed21.9
  • Hex38.1
  • International Draughts42.5
  • Game of the Amazons16.2
  • Tumbleweed1 of 2 failed15.2

Each game counts every generation attempt, a failed one as 0 (“1 of 2 failed” marks games with failed attempts). Scores are relative within each game, across the included settings; they do not compare game difficulty.

What this result shows

Strongest included setting: Reasoning enabled (33.0).

Across included settings, the highest game score is International Draughts (42.5); the lowest is Shogi (0.0). Each game counts every generation attempt, a failed one as 0. These are relative scores within each game, not direct comparisons of difficulty.

Match evidence measures these retained programs. It does not establish how a fresh generation will perform. Independent-generation variation is not estimated in this release.

Test protocol and evidence limits
Model identifier
qwen/qwen3.7-plus
Provider route (catalog)
openrouter
Prompt identity / profile
Not retained in this result set / Not retained in this result set
Prompt version
Not retained in this result set
Generation policy
Generation-quality admission policy (see methodology)
Requested output-token limits
Not retained (0 of 29 indexed attempts)

Generation evidence

  • Reasoning disabled: 6 contributing player programs across 6 games
  • Reasoning enabled: 6 contributing player programs across 6 games

Counts describe contributing programs, not independent replications: repairs and resends are not new independent samples. Independent-generation lineage is not retained.

GameReasoning groupProgramsWorking-program strengthRaw ratingCombined record (W / D / L)
GoBalanced1 working of 1 attempt50.91478.0208 / 88 / 220
GoBaseline1 working of 2 attempts19.01137.937 / 108 / 371
ChessBalanced1 working of 1 attempt43.01417.83 / 391 / 86
ChessBaseline1 working of 1 attempt38.71383.83 / 350 / 127
XiangqiBaseline1 working of 1 attempt43.81426.841 / 337 / 119
HexBalanced1 working of 1 attempt44.01362.1225 / 0 / 305
HexBaseline1 working of 1 attempt32.21205.7164 / 0 / 366
International DraughtsBalanced1 working of 1 attempt71.11773.3331 / 22 / 149
International DraughtsBaseline1 working of 1 attempt13.9852.956 / 5 / 441
Game of the AmazonsBalanced1 working of 1 attempt24.41112.5117 / 0 / 413
Game of the AmazonsBaseline1 working of 1 attempt8.1777.336 / 0 / 494
TumbleweedBalanced1 working of 1 attempt30.41175.449 / 204 / 285

Each row covers all the model's programs in one game and setting. Strength and raw rating are attempt-weighted means; under them, each program's score and the lowest and highest rating describe the programs (not a confidence interval). The combined record adds up their matches: evidence volume, not strength.

Failures and budgets

5 model-code generation failures; 0 provider/infrastructure failures excluded from the generation denominator. Runtime player faults are separate: 0 recorded one-sided faults across contributing program rows. A crash or illegal move pinned on one program also counts as that program's loss in its match record; other faults, such as timeouts, are left out of rating evidence.

Repair/resend outcomes and available costs are included. Exact retry ceilings and execution budgets are not retained in this result set; see the methodology for the public policy. Do not infer a measured setting from a current provider catalog.

Player program results

Reasoning enabled: 13% / 62% / 25% · n 8Reasoning disabled: 45% / 22% / 33% · n 9 No Overall rankIntensive not supportedMany programs needed repairMany programs failed

Generation cost

$0.03average estimated cost per game and reasoning setting

Median
$0.01
Range
$0.0052–$0.09
Known cost subtotal (incomplete or unverified charges)
$0.52
Cost data
16 combinations · 17 runs
Price source
Provider-reported
Price list
Not recorded for this older data
Average output
20k tokens
Output range
2.3k–63k tokens
Runs with output-token data
17
How cost is measured

Comparison cost gives equal weight to each model, game, and reasoning-setting combination. Recorded generation attempts include repairs and resends when cost evidence is available; runtime compute and service operation are excluded. Cost and output-token counts use separate telemetry denominators. A list-price estimate is not actual expenditure; mixed evidence is not a uniform standard-price comparison.

Test protocol

  • Combines this model's tested reasoning settings
  • Player-program generation; retained protocol details are under “Test protocol and evidence limits” above