Foundation models have been increasingly applied to behavioral science domains such as psychology, sociology, and economics. While these models show promise in tasks such as survey response prediction and human-subject experiment simulation, there remains no systematic understanding of how well they perform across diverse behavioral science tasks. We introduce BehaviorBench, a comprehensive benchmark that evaluates foundation models along four core capabilities: (1) behavior prediction and simulation, (2) strategic decision-making, (3) subject-trait inference, and (4) behavioral knowledge application. Crucially, BehaviorBench evaluates model outputs at both the individual and distributional levels, capturing not only per-subject accuracy but also population-level alignment, an essential requirement for behavioral validity. Our evaluation shows that BehaviorBench remains challenging for leading general-purpose LLMs and behavior foundation models that are specifically trained with behavioral data. We find that individual-level and distributional performance do not always align. General-purpose LLMs tend to underestimate the diversity of human responses, whereas behavior foundation models often lag behind at individual-level prediction. Our investigation further demonstrates how fine-tuning on diverse behavioral data can improve both individual-level prediction and distributional alignment, balancing these two objectives. Our results highlight the importance of evaluation at both individual and distributional levels, establishing BehaviorBench as a foundation for developing and assessing behaviorally aligned AI systems. Our BehaviorBench and models can be accessed via https://umich-foreseer.github.io/behaviorbench/

翻译：暂无翻译