Benchmark Almanac

Do You See Me

Human 95.8% tops its leaderboard o3 51.1% leads the models we track
STEP3-VL-10B 67.5% leads since January 2026
Only in system cards

Models answer 2,612 visual perception questions on 1,758 images across seven 2D and 3D subtasks drawn from human psychology. Questions are multiple choice or numeric.

Humans score 96.49% in the paper. Task complexity is controllable.

Released
May 2025
Kind
General visual questions
Level
Everyday
Scored
Checked automatically
Answers
Short answer
Tasks
All public
Strongest model tested
o3 #83 on the capability index
Last in a system card
January 2026
Last model added
January 2026
Scores refreshed
November 12th, 2026

In the authors’ words

Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) show reasoning promise, yet their visual perception is a critical bottleneck. Strikingly, MLLMs can produce correct answers even while misinterpreting crucial visual elements, masking these underlying failures. Our preliminary study on a joint perception-reasoning dataset revealed that for one leading MLLM, 29% of its correct answers to reasoning questions still exhibited visual perception errors. To systematically address this, we introduce "Do You See Me", a scalable benchmark with 1,758 images and 2,612 questions. It spans seven human-psychology inspired subtasks in 2D and 3D, featuring controllable complexity to rigorously evaluate MLLM visual skills. Our findings on 3 leading closed-source and 5 major open-source models reveal a stark deficit: humans achieve 96.49% accuracy, while top MLLMs average below 50%. This performance gap widens rapidly with increased task complexity (e.g., from 12% to 45% in the visual form constancy subtask). Further analysis into the root causes suggests that failures stem from challenges like misallocated visual attention and the instability of internal representations for fine-grained details, especially at or below encoder patch resolution. This underscores an urgent need for MLLMs with truly robust visual perception. The benchmark dataset, source code and evaluation scripts are available at https://github.com/microsoft/Do-You-See-Me.

Abstract of Do You See Me : A Multidimensional Benchmark for Evaluating Visual Perception in Multimodal LLMs (arXiv:2506.02022, CC0)
12
Entries on its own leaderboard, 5 models we track
1
System card reports it, from 1 lab

Human tops the leaderboard with 95.8%

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. The best model we track is o3, at 51.1%.

STEP3-VL-10B leads with 67.5%, 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 April 2025, and nobody has tested a newer one. Among the 20 highest-ranked models on the capability index, these have no score yet:

  1. 1 Human 95.8%
  2. 2 Gemini 2.0 Flash (snapshot unspecified) 54.5%
  3. 3 o3 51.1%
  4. 4 GPT-4o (snapshot unspecified) 50.4%
  5. 5 Claude Sonnet-3.5 (snapshot unspecified) 46.4%
  6. 6 Qwen2.5-VL-7B 44.9%
  7. 7 Gemini 2.5 Flash (snapshot unspecified) 44.1%
  8. 8 Gemini-1.5-Flash (snapshot unspecified) 40.9%
  9. 9 InternVL2.5-8B 37%
  10. 10 Gemma-3-12B-instruct 36%
  11. 11 Llama 3.2 11B 33.4%
  12. 12 Phi-4-multimodal 24.9%

Source: Official Do You See Me leaderboard

#EntryScoreSettingDateSource
1 Human 95.8% Official leaderboard
2 Gemini 2.0 Flash (snapshot unspecified) 54.5% Official leaderboard
3 o3 51.1% Apr 2025 Official leaderboard
4 GPT-4o (snapshot unspecified) 50.4% Official leaderboard
5 Claude Sonnet-3.5 (snapshot unspecified) 46.4% Official leaderboard
6 Qwen2.5-VL-7B 44.9% Jan 2025 Official leaderboard
7 Gemini 2.5 Flash (snapshot unspecified) 44.1% Official leaderboard
8 Gemini-1.5-Flash (snapshot unspecified) 40.9% Official leaderboard
9 InternVL2.5-8B 37% Dec 2024 Official leaderboard
10 Gemma-3-12B-instruct 36% Official leaderboard
11 Llama 3.2 11B 33.4% Sep 2024 Official leaderboard
12 Phi-4-multimodal 24.9% Feb 2025 Official leaderboard
#ModelScoreSettingDateSource
1 STEP3-VL-10B 67.5% Jan 2026 Lab model card
2 o3 51.1% Apr 2025 Official leaderboard
3 Qwen2.5-VL-7B 44.9% Jan 2025 Official leaderboard
4 InternVL2.5-8B 37% Dec 2024 Official leaderboard
5 Llama 3.2 11B 33.4% Sep 2024 Official leaderboard
6 Phi-4-multimodal 24.9% Feb 2025 Official leaderboard

Labs report scores for 1 model in their cards. Switch the scores above to rank them together.

Number one over time 2 models have held number one with claims included since its release in May 2025

Lab claims count from the day the card came out, independent runs from the model’s release.

OpenAI
Own leaderboard Not tested since May 2025
o3 51.1%

Source: Official Do You See Me leaderboard

Scores over time

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 Near the ceiling (85%) STEP3-VL-10B o3 Qwen2.5-VL-7B InternVL2.5-8B 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2025 2026 Near the ceiling (85%) STEP3-VL-10B o3

Sources: Official Do You See Me leaderboard and labs’ model cards

Labs report it only in system cards

We read the headline results of 522 launch posts from 52 labs, and none of them list this benchmark. Some system cards do, below.

One system card reports it

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
Jan 14, 2026 STEP3-VL-10B technical report 67.5 DoYouSeeMe, SeRe (Tables 1 and 3). PaCoRe 68.54 Capabilities

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%