Benchmark Almanac

Image2Struct

GPT-4o Aug 2024 94.7 leads since October 2024
Not in model cards

Vision-language models turn images of webpages, LaTeX and musical scores into code that renders them. The render is compared with the input image.

Fresh test data is downloaded from active online communities at run time. Three releases from v1.0.0 to v1.0.2.

Made by
Stanford CRFM
Released
October 2024
Kind
Documents, charts and text in images
Level
University
Scored
Checked automatically
Answers
Code
Tasks
All public
Strongest model tested
Claude 3.5 Sonnet (October 2024) #149 on the capability index
Last model added
October 2024
Scores refreshed
November 12th, 2026

In the authors’ words

We introduce Image2Struct, a benchmark to evaluate vision-language models (VLMs) on extracting structure from images. Our benchmark 1) captures real-world use cases, 2) is fully automatic and does not require human judgment, and 3) is based on a renewable stream of fresh data. In Image2Struct, VLMs are prompted to generate the underlying structure (e.g., LaTeX code or HTML) from an input image (e.g., webpage screenshot). The structure is then rendered to produce an output image (e.g., rendered webpage), which is compared against the input image to produce a similarity score. This round-trip evaluation allows us to quantitatively evaluate VLMs on tasks with multiple valid structures. We create a pipeline that downloads fresh data from active online communities upon execution and evaluates the VLMs without human intervention. We introduce three domains (Webpages, LaTeX, and Musical Scores) and use five image metrics (pixel similarity, cosine similarity between the Inception vectors, learned perceptual image patch similarity, structural similarity index measure, and earth mover similarity) that allow efficient and automatic comparison between pairs of images. We evaluate Image2Struct on 14 prominent VLMs and find that scores vary widely, indicating that Image2Struct can differentiate between the performances of different VLMs. Additionally, the best score varies considerably across domains (e.g., 0.402 on sheet music vs. 0.830 on LaTeX equations), indicating that Image2Struct contains tasks of varying difficulty. For transparency, we release the full results at https://crfm.stanford.edu/helm/image2struct/v1.0.1/.

Abstract of Image2Struct: Benchmarking Structure Extraction for Vision-Language Models (arXiv:2410.22456, CC0)
19
Entries on its own leaderboard, 18 models we track

GPT-4o leads with 94.7 among models released by October 2024

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 newest model with a score here came out in October 2024, and nobody has tested a newer one. Among the 20 highest-ranked models on the capability index, these have no score yet:

  1. 1 GPT-4o Aug 2024 94.7
  2. 2 GPT-4o May 2024 80.7
  3. 3 Gemini 1.5 Pro Sep 2024 79.0
  4. 4 Claude 3.5 Sonnet 73.7
  5. 5 Gemini 1.5 Flash Sep 2024 71.0
  6. 6 GPT-4o mini 70.2
  7. 7 Claude 3 Opus 62.3
  8. 8 Claude 3.5 Sonnet (October 2024) 60.5
  9. 9 Claude 3 Sonnet 49.1
  10. 10 Gemini 1.0 Pro Vision 47.4
  11. 11 GPT-4 Turbo Nov 2023 45.6
  12. 12 palmyra-vision-003 43.0
  13. 13 Pixtral 12B 41.2
  14. 14 llava-v1.6-vicuna-13b 31.6
  15. 15 Qwen-VL-Chat 24.6
  16. 16 LLaVA-v1.5-13B 21.9
  17. 17 IDEFICS-9B-Instruct 17.5
  18. 18 Idefics2-8B 12.3
  19. 19 IDEFICS-80B-Instruct 7.02

Source: Official Image2Struct leaderboard

#EntryScoreSettingDateSource
1 GPT-4o Aug 2024 94.7 Aug 2024 Official leaderboard
2 GPT-4o May 2024 80.7 May 2024 Official leaderboard
3 Gemini 1.5 Pro Sep 2024 79.0 Sep 2024 Official leaderboard
4 Claude 3.5 Sonnet 73.7 Jun 2024 Official leaderboard
5 Gemini 1.5 Flash Sep 2024 71.0 Aug 2024 Official leaderboard
6 GPT-4o mini 70.2 Jul 2024 Official leaderboard
7 Claude 3 Opus 62.3 Feb 2024 Official leaderboard
8 Claude 3.5 Sonnet (October 2024) 60.5 Oct 2024 Official leaderboard
9 Claude 3 Sonnet 49.1 Feb 2024 Official leaderboard
10 Gemini 1.0 Pro Vision 47.4 Jan 2024 Official leaderboard
11 GPT-4 Turbo Nov 2023 45.6 Nov 2023 Official leaderboard
12 palmyra-vision-003 43.0 Official leaderboard
13 Pixtral 12B 41.2 Sep 2024 Official leaderboard
14 llava-v1.6-vicuna-13b 31.6 Jan 2024 Official leaderboard
15 Qwen-VL-Chat 24.6 Aug 2023 Official leaderboard
16 LLaVA-v1.5-13B 21.9 Oct 2023 Official leaderboard
17 IDEFICS-9B-Instruct 17.5 Jul 2023 Official leaderboard
18 Idefics2-8B 12.3 Apr 2024 Official leaderboard
19 IDEFICS-80B-Instruct 7.02 Jul 2023 Official leaderboard

Number one over time

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

OpenAI
Own leaderboard Not tested since Oct 2024
GPT-4o 94.7

Source: Official Image2Struct 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
0.00 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0 2024 2025 0.00 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0 2024 2025

Source: Official Image2Struct leaderboard

No lab model card reports it yet

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

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%