Benchmark Almanac

BabyVision

Qwen 3.8 Max 91.3% leads since August 2026
Kimi K3.1 Pro 95.4% leads since October 2026
In use

Model solves 388 perception-heavy visual puzzles (discrimination, tracking, spatial, patterns) that young children solve. Accuracy versus 94% human baseline.

Moonshot AI is a listed collaborator.

Made by
UniPat AI + xbench
Released
January 2026
Kind
Spatial reasoning and counting
Level
Everyday
Scored
Checked automatically
Answers
Short answer
Tasks
All public
Strongest model tested
Claude Fable 5 #11 on the capability index
Last in a launch post
November 2026
Last model added
November 2026
Scores refreshed
November 12th, 2026

In the authors’ words

While humans develop core visual skills long before acquiring language, contemporary Multimodal LLMs (MLLMs) still rely heavily on linguistic priors to compensate for their fragile visual understanding. We uncovered a crucial fact: state-of-the-art MLLMs consistently fail on basic visual tasks that humans, even 3-year-olds, can solve effortlessly. To systematically investigate this gap, we introduce BabyVision, a benchmark designed to assess core visual abilities independent of linguistic knowledge for MLLMs. BabyVision spans a wide range of tasks, with 388 items divided into 22 subclasses across four key categories. Empirical results and human evaluation reveal that leading MLLMs perform significantly below human baselines. Gemini3-Pro-Preview scores 49.7, lagging behind 6-year-old humans and falling well behind the average adult score of 94.1. These results show despite excelling in knowledge-heavy evaluations, current MLLMs still lack fundamental visual primitives. Progress in BabyVision represents a step toward human-level visual perception and reasoning capabilities. We also explore solving visual reasoning with generation models by proposing BabyVision-Gen and automatic evaluation toolkit. Our code and benchmark data are released at https://github.com/UniPat-AI/BabyVision for reproduction.

Abstract of BabyVision: Visual Reasoning Beyond Language (arXiv:2601.06521, CC0)
28
Entries on its own leaderboard, 27 models we track
25
Launch posts list it, from 10 labs
8
System cards report it, from 6 labs

Qwen 3.8 Max leads with 91.3% among models released by August 2026

Best score per entry from the benchmark's own leaderboard, read on November 12th, 2026. Where a model ran with several settings or harnesses, we keep its best. Names in gray aren't in our model list: fine-tunes, agent systems, products and older models. They don't count toward leaders.

Kimi K3.1 Pro leads with 95.4%, claims included

Best score per model from every source, including labs’ own numbers and claims Epoch AI collected from reports and papers. Labs pick their own settings, so a claim can beat an independent run of the same model.

The newest model with a score here came out in August 2026, and nobody has tested a newer one. Among the 20 highest-ranked models on the capability index, these have no score yet:

  1. 1 Qwen 3.8 Max 91.3%
  2. 2 Claude Fable 5 max 90.5%
  3. 3 GPT-5.6 Sol max 88.9%
  4. 4 Kimi K3 85.7%
  5. 5 GPT-5.5 xhigh 83.6%
  6. 6 Claude Opus 4.8 max 81.2%
  7. 7 Muse Spark 1.1 76.3%
  8. 8 Seed2.1 Pro 73.7%
  9. 9 Qwen3.7-Plus 70.4%
  10. 10 Kimi K2.6 68.5%
  11. 11 Seed2.0 Pro high 60.6%
  12. 12 Gemini 3.1 Pro 51.6%
  13. 13 Gemini 3 Pro 49.7%
  14. 14 GPT-5.4 xhigh 49.7%
  15. 15 Qwen3.5 397B-A17B 43.3%
  16. 16 Kimi K2.5 36.5%
  17. 17 GPT-5.2 34.4%
  18. 18 Seed1.8 30.2%
  19. 19 Qwen3-VL-235B-A22B 22.2%
  20. 20 InternVL3.5-241B-A28B 19.2%
  21. 21 Qwen3-VL-Plus 19.2%
  22. 22 GLM-4.6V 17.6%
  23. 23 Grok 4 16.2%
  24. 24 MiMo-VL-7B-RL 15.1%
  25. 25 Claude Opus 4.6 14.8%
  26. 26 Step 3 14.7%
  27. 27 Claude Opus 4.5 14.2%
  28. 28 KimiVL-A3B 12.4%

Source: Official BabyVision leaderboard

Sources: Labs’ model cards and official BabyVision leaderboard

#EntryScoreSettingDateSource
1 Qwen 3.8 Max 91.3% tools Aug 2026 Official leaderboard
2 Claude Fable 5 90.5% max, tools Jun 2026 Official leaderboard
3 GPT-5.6 Sol 88.9% max, tools Jul 2026 Official leaderboard
4 Kimi K3 85.7% Python tools Jul 2026 Official leaderboard
5 GPT-5.5 83.6% xhigh, tools Apr 2026 Official leaderboard
6 Claude Opus 4.8 81.2% max, tools May 2026 Official leaderboard
7 Muse Spark 1.1 76.3% tools Jul 2026 Official leaderboard
8 Seed2.1 Pro 73.7% Jun 2026 Official leaderboard
9 Qwen3.7-Plus 70.4% tools Jun 2026 Official leaderboard
10 Kimi K2.6 68.5% tools Apr 2026 Official leaderboard
11 Seed2.0 Pro 60.6% high Feb 2026 Official leaderboard
12 Gemini 3.1 Pro 51.6% Feb 2026 Official leaderboard
13 Gemini 3 Pro 49.7% Nov 2025 Official leaderboard
14 GPT-5.4 49.7% xhigh Mar 2026 Official leaderboard
15 Qwen3.5 397B-A17B 43.3% Feb 2026 Official leaderboard
16 Kimi K2.5 36.5% Jan 2026 Official leaderboard
17 GPT-5.2 34.4% Dec 2025 Official leaderboard
18 Seed1.8 30.2% Dec 2025 Official leaderboard
19 Qwen3-VL-235B-A22B 22.2% Sep 2025 Official leaderboard
20 InternVL3.5-241B-A28B 19.2% Aug 2025 Official leaderboard
21 Qwen3-VL-Plus 19.2% Sep 2025 Official leaderboard
22 GLM-4.6V 17.6% Dec 2025 Official leaderboard
23 Grok 4 16.2% Jul 2025 Official leaderboard
24 MiMo-VL-7B-RL 15.1% May 2025 Official leaderboard
25 Claude Opus 4.6 14.8% Feb 2026 Official leaderboard
26 Step 3 14.7% Jul 2025 Official leaderboard
27 Claude Opus 4.5 14.2% Nov 2025 Official leaderboard
28 KimiVL-A3B 12.4% Apr 2025 Official leaderboard
#ModelScoreSettingDateSource
1 Kimi K3.1 Pro 95.4% Oct 2026 Lab model card
2 Qwen3.8 Max (0902) 93.8% Sep 2026 Lab model card
3 DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 92.5% Oct 2026 Lab model card
4 Qwen 3.8 Max 91.3% tools Aug 2026 Official leaderboard
5 MiniMax-M3.1-Flash 91% Oct 2026 Lab model card
6 Claude Fable 5 90.5% max, tools Jun 2026 Official leaderboard
7 DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 89.6% Sep 2026 Lab model card
8 GPT-5.6 Sol 88.9% max, tools Jul 2026 Official leaderboard
9 Kimi K3 85.7% Python tools Jul 2026 Official leaderboard
10 Qwen 3.8 27B 85.6% Aug 2026 Lab model card
11 GPT-5.5 83.6% xhigh, tools Apr 2026 Official leaderboard
12 Claude Opus 4.8 81.2% max, tools May 2026 Official leaderboard
13 Muse Spark Open 80.2% Oct 2026 Lab model card
14 Muse Spark 1.1 76.3% tools Jul 2026 Official leaderboard
15 Seed2.1 Pro 73.7% Jun 2026 Official leaderboard
16 Qwen3.7-Plus 70.4% tools Jun 2026 Official leaderboard
17 Inkling 2 Small 68.6% Nov 2026 Lab model card
18 Kimi K2.6 68.5% tools Apr 2026 Official leaderboard
19 Seed2.0 Lite (0428) 64.7% Apr 2026 Lab model card
20 Seed2.0 Pro 60.6% high Feb 2026 Official leaderboard
21 GLM-5.3-Flash 53.4% Aug 2026 Lab model card
22 Qwen3.5 397B-A17B 52.3% Feb 2026 Lab model card
23 Gemini 3.1 Pro 51.6% Feb 2026 Official leaderboard
24 Gemini 3 Pro 49.7% Nov 2025 Official leaderboard
25 GPT-5.4 49.7% xhigh Mar 2026 Official leaderboard
26 Qwen3.5-27B 44.6% Feb 2026 Lab model card
27 Qwen3.5-122B-A10B 40.2% Feb 2026 Lab model card
28 Qwen3.5-35B-A3B 38.4% Feb 2026 Lab model card
29 Kimi K2.5 36.5% Jan 2026 Official leaderboard
30 GPT-5.2 34.4% Dec 2025 Official leaderboard
31 Seed1.8 30.2% Dec 2025 Official leaderboard
32 Nemotron 3.5 Super VL 29.6% Oct 2026 Lab model card
33 Qwen3.5-9B 28.6% Mar 2026 Lab model card
34 Qwen3-VL-235B-A22B 22.2% Sep 2025 Official leaderboard
35 InternVL3.5-241B-A28B 19.2% Aug 2025 Official leaderboard
36 Qwen3-VL-Plus 19.2% Sep 2025 Official leaderboard
37 EXAONE 4.5 33B 18.8% Apr 2026 Lab model card
38 GLM-4.6V 17.6% Dec 2025 Official leaderboard
39 Grok 4 16.2% Jul 2025 Official leaderboard
40 Qwen3.5-4B 16% Mar 2026 Lab model card
41 MiMo-VL-7B-RL 15.1% May 2025 Official leaderboard
42 Claude Opus 4.6 14.8% Feb 2026 Official leaderboard
43 Step 3 14.7% Jul 2025 Official leaderboard
44 Claude Opus 4.5 14.2% Nov 2025 Official leaderboard

Labs report scores for 26 models in their cards. Switch the scores above to rank them together.

6 models have held number one on the official leaderboard since its release in January 2026 8 models have held number one with claims included since its release in January 2026

Lab claims count from the day the card came out, independent runs from the model’s release. We draw one row each for the benchmark’s own leaderboard and what labs claim in their cards.

Google DeepMind ByteDance Seed Moonshot AI OpenAI Anthropic Qwen Meta
Own leaderboard Passed 85% in Jun 2026, by Claude Fable 5
Qwen 3.8 Max 91.3%
Lab claims Passed 85% in Jul 2026, by Kimi K3

Sources: Official BabyVision leaderboard and labs’ model cards

Claude Fable 5 on the official leaderboard passed 85% in June 2026

All the scores we have, one dot each, so a model tested at several settings appears more than once.

On the benchmark’s own leaderboard Reported by the lab in its model card Best so far
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2025 2026 2027 Near the ceiling (85%) Kimi K3.1 Pro Claude Fable 5 GPT-5.5 Kimi K2.6 Seed2.0 Pro Gemini 3 Pro Qwen3-VL-235B-A22B 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2025 2026 2027 Near the ceiling (85%) Kimi K3.1 Pro GPT-5.5

Sources: Official BabyVision leaderboard and labs’ model cards

9 labs put it in a launch post in the last six months

Launch posts from every lab that has listed it, one tick per post. Tall colored ticks include it, and short gray ones leave it out.

ByteDance Seed
Qwen
LG AI Research
Moonshot AI
Meta
Z.ai
DeepSeek
NVIDIA
MiniMax
Thinking Machines
DateLaunch postScoreAs the post writes it
Nov 5, 2026 Inkling 2 Small 68.6 BabyVision (original; 93.7 with Python)
Oct 24, 2026 Kimi K3.1 Pro 95.4 BabyVision w/ python
Oct 19, 2026 MiniMax-M3.1-Flash 91 BabyVision (with tools)
Oct 17, 2026 DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 92.5 BabyVision (w/tools)
Oct 15, 2026 Muse Spark Open 80.2 BabyVision (w/ tools)
Oct 15, 2026 Nemotron 3.5 Super VL 29.6 BabyVision
Sep 10, 2026 DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 89.6 BabyVision w/ tools (Pass@1)
Sep 2, 2026 Qwen3.8 Max (0902) 93.8 General visual reasoning, BabyVision (w/ CI)
Aug 26, 2026 GLM-5.3-Flash 53.4 BabyVision
Aug 14, 2026 Qwen 3.8 27B 85.6 General visual reasoning BabyVision Without CI 65.7 With CI 85.6
Aug 3, 2026 Qwen 3.8 Max 91.3 BabyVision (without CI / with CI) 82.0 / 91.3
Jul 16, 2026 Kimi K3 85.7 BabyVision w/ python
Jul 9, 2026 Muse Spark 1.1 76.3 BabyVision (Visual reasoning)
Jun 23, 2026 Seed2.1 Pro 73.7 BabyVision
Jun 1, 2026 Qwen3.7-Plus 70.4 BabyVision 70.4 / 64.7 (with CI / without CI)
Apr 28, 2026 Seed2.0 Lite (0428) 64.7 BabyVision
Apr 20, 2026 Kimi K2.6 39.8 BabyVision
Apr 9, 2026 EXAONE 4.5 33B 18.8 BabyVision
Mar 2, 2026 Qwen3.5-4B 16 BabyVision 16.0/19.1 (with CI / without CI)
Mar 2, 2026 Qwen3.5-9B 28.6 BabyVision 28.6/25.8 (with CI / without CI)
Feb 24, 2026 Qwen3.5-35B-A3B 38.4 BabyVision 38.4 / 29.6 (with CI / without CI)
Feb 24, 2026 Qwen3.5-27B 44.6 BabyVision 44.6 / 34.8 (with CI / without CI)
Feb 24, 2026 Qwen3.5-122B-A10B 40.2 BabyVision 40.2 / 34.5 (with CI / without CI)
Feb 16, 2026 Qwen3.5 397B-A17B 52.3 BabyVision (52.3/43.3)
Feb 14, 2026 Seed2.0 Pro 60.6 BabyVision

8 system cards report it, from 6 labs

Besides launch posts, we read the system cards, model cards and technical reports labs publish with a release. They report far more, including safety and frontier-risk tests.

DateDocumentScoreAs the document writes itSection
Oct 15, 2026 Nemotron 3.5 Super VL technical report 29.6 BabyVision (Table 10) Capabilities
Sep 10, 2026 DeepSeek V4.1 Flash technical report 89.6 BabyVision w/ tools (Pass@1) (Table 3) Capabilities
Jul 27, 2026 Kimi K3 technical report 85.7 BabyVision w/ Python, the only setting reported (Table 2) Capabilities
Jul 9, 2026 Muse Spark 1.1 system card 76.3 BabyVision (w/ tools) (Figure 44) Capabilities
Jun 23, 2026 Seed2.1 Pro model card 73.7 BabyVision (Table 9) Capabilities
Apr 9, 2026 EXAONE 4.5 33B technical report 18.8 BabyVision (Table 2, Reasoning mode) Capabilities
Feb 14, 2026 Seed2.0 Pro model card 60.6 BabyVision (Table 8) Capabilities
Jan 30, 2026 Kimi K2.5 technical report 36.5 BabyVision (Table 4) Capabilities

The lab's number comes out ahead in 1 of 2 pairs that differ

Each score a lab reported for its own model, beside the same model's best score on the leaderboard. Gaps mostly come from different harnesses, effort levels and task subsets. 7 of them match, which usually means one side copied the other. Every benchmark.

Model Lab says Board says Gap What differs
Kimi K2.6 39.8% BabyVision 68.5% Leaderboard, tools −29 pts The lab score excludes Python tools, while the board reports the Python-enabled run.
Qwen3.5 397B-A17B 52.3% BabyVision (52.3/43.3) 43.3% Leaderboard +9.0 pts
Seed2.0 Pro 60.6% BabyVision 60.6% Leaderboard, high Same
Qwen3.7-Plus 70.4% BabyVision 70.4 / 64.7 (with CI / without CI) 70.4% Leaderboard, tools Same
Seed2.1 Pro 73.7% BabyVision 73.7% Leaderboard Same
Muse Spark 1.1 76.3% BabyVision (Visual reasoning) 76.3% Leaderboard, tools Same
Kimi K3 85.7% BabyVision w/ python 85.7% Leaderboard, Python tools Same
Qwen 3.8 Max 91.3% BabyVision (without CI / with CI) 82.0 / 91.3 91.3% Leaderboard, tools Same
Kimi K2.5 36.5% BabyVision (Table 4) 36.5% Leaderboard Same

More in Vision

All 281 in Vision
  • MMMU In use 11.5K college-level multimodal questions across 30 subjects. Multiple-choice and open accuracy. GPT-5.1 85.4%
  • MMMU-Pro In use Harder MMMU: college-level multimodal questions with more options and vision-only inputs to remove text shortcuts. GPT-5.6 Sol 84.6%
  • CharXiv In use Chart understanding on real arXiv figures. Reasoning questions require synthesizing information from complex charts. Claude Fable 5 93.5%
  • MATH-Vision (MathVision) In use 3,040 competition math problems with visual context. Answer accuracy. Qwen 3.8 Max 97.7%
  • MMStar In use Models answer 1,500 human-curated image questions that cannot be solved without the image, across 6 core capabilities. Scored by accuracy. Qwen 3.8 Max 85.9%
  • ChartQA In use Models answer human-written and generated questions about chart images that need visual and arithmetic reasoning. Scored by relaxed accuracy with a 5 percent numeric tolerance. Command A Vision 90.9%