Benchmark Almanac

Humanity's Sixth Sense

Gemini 4 Carbon 71.1% leads since October 2026
In use

Models answer open-ended questions about what an image or short video implies but does not show, such as hidden objects, causes and intentions. An LLM judge checks each answer against a human-written rubric.

522 tasks on 288 images and 234 video clips. A task counts only if every rubric item is met. People score 93.1% and the best of 25 models 53.6%.

Made by
Scale AI and Elorian
Released
October 2026
Kind
General visual questions
Level
Everyday
Scored
Graded by a model
Answers
Open-ended
Tasks
All public
Strongest model tested
Claude Fable 5.2 #1 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

Humans perceive far more in a scene than what is explicitly depicted: a single glance captures past causes and future trajectories; a quick peek determines if a vehicle can fit between two parked cars; a few seconds of video reveals who holds authority in a room; and a fleeting clip highlights subtle abstract patterns like unwritten rules or hidden labels. This capacity reflects a form of humanity's sixth sense: an intuitive reasoning mechanism that recovers implicit information beyond raw sensory perception. Crucially, this rapid, zero-shot visual intuition underpins everyday navigation and social interaction, making it a vital capability for Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) deployed alongside people. Existing visual benchmarks, however, target either deliberate expert-level analysis in academic and mathematical domains or low-level perception, leaving the intuitive reasoning that people perform largely untested. To bridge this gap, we introduce Humanity's Sixth Sense (HSS), a benchmark for intuitive visual reasoning. HSS spans diverse image and video inputs, organizes items under a structured taxonomy, and pairs each with human-written prompts probing the implicit temporal, spatial, social, and abstract structure that people infer at a glance. Frontier MLLMs fall short of human performance: participants reach 93.1% accuracy, while the strongest model, GPT-6-astra, reaches only 53.6% even at maximum reasoning effort. Despite excelling in many complex tasks that require advanced perception and knowledge, current models still struggle significantly on these visual tasks that are intuitive for humans. We further explore agentic setup that apply dynamic visual manipulation to HSS, which narrows but does not close the gap. HSS establishes intuitive visual reasoning as a measurable axis and directs attention to a capability that scaling on current benchmarks has so far left behind.

Abstract of Humanity's Sixth Sense: Benchmarking Intuitive Visual Reasoning in Multimodal Models (arXiv:2610.08966, CC0)
34
Models scored on its own leaderboard
1
Launch post lists it, from 1 lab

Gemini 4 Carbon leads with 71.1%

Best score per model from the benchmark's own leaderboard, read on November 12th, 2026. Where a model ran with several settings or harnesses, we keep its best.

  1. 1 Gemini 4 Carbon high 71.1%
  2. 2 Claude Fable 5.2 max 59.5%
  3. 3 Gemini 4 Argon high 55.4%
  4. 4 GPT-6 Astra max 53.6%
  5. 5 GPT-6.1 Sol max 46.6%
  6. 6 Claude Opus 5.5 xhigh 44.6%
  7. 7 Muse Wonder max 43.7%
  8. 8 Gemini 3.8 Flash high 41.6%
  9. 9 Claude Fable 5.1 40.8%
  10. 10 Gemini 3.7 Flash high 39.8%
  11. 11 Muse Spark 1.3 max 37.4%
  12. 12 Claude Fable 5 max 34.5%
  13. 13 Inkling 2 Small 33.3%
  14. 14 Kimi K3.1 Pro max 33.2%
  15. 15 Qwen 3.8 Max max 33%
  16. 16 Gemini 3.5 Flash high 32.6%
  17. 17 Gemini 3.6 Flash high 31.9%
  18. 18 GPT-6 Sol max 31.2%
  19. 19 Qwen3.8 Flash max 30.9%
  20. 20 Claude Opus 5 max 30.5%
  21. 21 DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 max 30.1%
  22. 22 GPT-5.6 Sol max 30%
  23. 23 Muse Spark Open max 29.6%
  24. 24 GLM-5.3-Flash max 26.8%
  25. 25 Kimi K3 max 25.5%
  26. 26 MiMo-V2.6 Flash high 25.4%
  27. 27 MiMo-V2.6 Pro high 25.2%
  28. 28 Claude Sonnet 5 max 24.8%
  29. 29 Nemotron 3.5 Super VL max 24.7%
  30. 30 Muse Spark 1.2 xhigh 24.5%
  31. 31 Claude Opus 4.8 max 23.5%
  32. 32 GPT-5.6 Terra max 22.7%
  33. 33 GPT-5.6 Luna max 21.6%
  34. 34 GPT-6 Luna max 21%

Source: Official Humanity's Sixth Sense leaderboard

#ModelScoreSettingDateSource
1 Gemini 4 Carbon 71.1% high Oct 2026 Official leaderboard
2 Claude Fable 5.2 59.5% max Nov 2026 Official leaderboard
3 Gemini 4 Argon 55.4% high Sep 2026 Official leaderboard
4 GPT-6 Astra 53.6% max Sep 2026 Official leaderboard
5 GPT-6.1 Sol 46.6% max Sep 2026 Official leaderboard
6 Claude Opus 5.5 44.6% xhigh Sep 2026 Official leaderboard
7 Muse Wonder 43.7% max Oct 2026 Official leaderboard
8 Gemini 3.8 Flash 41.6% high Sep 2026 Official leaderboard
9 Claude Fable 5.1 40.8% Sep 2026 Official leaderboard
10 Gemini 3.7 Flash 39.8% high Aug 2026 Official leaderboard
11 Muse Spark 1.3 37.4% max Sep 2026 Official leaderboard
12 Claude Fable 5 34.5% max Jun 2026 Official leaderboard
13 Inkling 2 Small 33.3% Nov 2026 Official leaderboard
14 Kimi K3.1 Pro 33.2% max Oct 2026 Official leaderboard
15 Qwen 3.8 Max 33% max Aug 2026 Official leaderboard
16 Gemini 3.5 Flash 32.6% high May 2026 Official leaderboard
17 Gemini 3.6 Flash 31.9% high Jul 2026 Official leaderboard
18 GPT-6 Sol 31.2% max Sep 2026 Official leaderboard
19 Qwen3.8 Flash 30.9% max Aug 2026 Official leaderboard
20 Claude Opus 5 30.5% max Jul 2026 Official leaderboard
21 DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 30.1% max Oct 2026 Official leaderboard
22 GPT-5.6 Sol 30% max Jul 2026 Official leaderboard
23 Muse Spark Open 29.6% max Oct 2026 Official leaderboard
24 GLM-5.3-Flash 26.8% max Aug 2026 Official leaderboard
25 Kimi K3 25.5% max Jul 2026 Official leaderboard
26 MiMo-V2.6 Flash 25.4% high Sep 2026 Official leaderboard
27 MiMo-V2.6 Pro 25.2% high Sep 2026 Official leaderboard
28 Claude Sonnet 5 24.8% max Jun 2026 Official leaderboard
29 Nemotron 3.5 Super VL 24.7% max Oct 2026 Official leaderboard
30 Muse Spark 1.2 24.5% xhigh Aug 2026 Official leaderboard
31 Claude Opus 4.8 23.5% max May 2026 Official leaderboard
32 GPT-5.6 Terra 22.7% max Jul 2026 Official leaderboard
33 GPT-5.6 Luna 21.6% max Jul 2026 Official leaderboard
34 GPT-6 Luna 21% max Sep 2026 Official leaderboard

Labs report scores for 1 model in their cards. We plot every source in the charts below.

2 models have held number one on the official leaderboard since its release in October 2026

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

Google DeepMind
Own leaderboard 2 leaders

Source: Official Humanity's Sixth Sense 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% 2026 2027 Near the ceiling (85%) Gemini 4 Carbon Gemini 4 Argon Gemini 3.8 Flash Claude Fable 5 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2026 2027 Near the ceiling (85%) Gemini 4 Carbon Gemini 4 Argon

Sources: Official Humanity's Sixth Sense leaderboard and labs’ model cards

One lab 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.

Thinking Machines
DateLaunch postScoreAs the post writes it
Nov 5, 2026 Inkling 2 Small 33.3 HSS

One lab claim next to the leaderboard

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. 1 of them match, which usually means one side copied the other. Every benchmark.

Model Lab says Board says Gap
Inkling 2 Small 33.3% HSS 33.3% 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%