Benchmark Almanac

MathCanvas-Bench

Gemini-2.5-Pro (snapshot unspecified) 47.9% tops its leaderboard Seed1.6-Thinking 44.1% leads the models we track
Seed2.0 Pro 61.9% leads since February 2026
Fading

Models solve 3,000 math problems that call for interleaved visual and textual solutions, such as drawing auxiliary lines in geometry.

Released with the BAGEL-Canvas model. The scoring field is a guess.

Released
October 2025
Kind
Visual math and diagrams
Level
School
Scored
Checked automatically
Answers
Short answer
Strongest model tested
GPT-5 #70 on the capability index
Last in a launch post
February 2026, dropped before it saturated
Last model added
February 2026
Scores refreshed
November 12th, 2026

In the authors’ words

While Large Language Models (LLMs) have excelled in textual reasoning, they struggle with mathematical domains like geometry that intrinsically rely on visual aids. Existing approaches to Visual Chain-of-Thought (VCoT) are often limited by rigid external tools or fail to generate the high-fidelity, strategically-timed diagrams necessary for complex problem-solving. To bridge this gap, we introduce MathCanvas, a comprehensive framework designed to endow unified Large Multimodal Models (LMMs) with intrinsic VCoT capabilities for mathematics. Our approach consists of two phases. First, a Visual Manipulation stage pre-trains the model on a novel 15.2M-pair corpus, comprising 10M caption-to-diagram pairs (MathCanvas-Imagen) and 5.2M step-by-step editing trajectories (MathCanvas-Edit), to master diagram generation and editing. Second, a Strategic Visual-Aided Reasoning stage fine-tunes the model on MathCanvas-Instruct, a new 219K-example dataset of interleaved visual-textual reasoning paths, teaching it when and how to leverage visual aids. To facilitate rigorous evaluation, we introduce MathCanvas-Bench, a challenging benchmark with 3K problems that require models to produce interleaved visual-textual solutions. Our model, BAGEL-Canvas, trained under this framework, achieves an 86% relative improvement over strong LMM baselines on MathCanvas-Bench, demonstrating excellent generalization to other public math benchmarks. Our work provides a complete toolkit-framework, datasets, and benchmark-to unlock complex, human-like visual-aided reasoning in LMMs. Project Page: https://mathcanvas.github.io/

Abstract of MathCanvas: Intrinsic Visual Chain-of-Thought for Multimodal Mathematical Reasoning (arXiv:2510.14958, CC0)
22
Entries on its own leaderboard, 16 models we track
1
Launch post lists it, from 1 lab
1
System card reports it, from 1 lab

Gemini-2.5-Pro (snapshot unspecified) tops the leaderboard with 47.9%

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 Seed1.6-Thinking, at 44.1%.

Seed2.0 Pro leads with 61.9%, 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 October 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 Gemini-2.5-Pro (snapshot unspecified) thinking; complete 47.9%
  2. 2 Seed1.6-Thinking thinking; complete 44.1%
  3. 3 GPT-5 thinking; complete 43.5%
  4. 4 Qwen3-VL-Plus thinking; complete 40.9%
  5. 5 Gemini-2.5-Flash (snapshot unspecified) thinking; complete 39.3%
  6. 6 GLM-4.5V thinking; complete 35.6%
  7. 7 Nano-Banana non-thinking; complete 33.2%
  8. 8 Claude Sonnet 4 thinking; complete 25%
  9. 9 BAGEL-Canvas non-thinking; complete 21.9%
  10. 10 Gemini 2.0 Flash Feb 2025, non-thinking; complete 21.2%
  11. 11 Qwen2.5-VL-72B non-thinking; complete 21.1%
  12. 12 GPT-4.1 non-thinking; complete 19%
  13. 13 Keye-VL-1.5-8B thinking; complete 17.1%
  14. 14 InternVL3.5-8B non-thinking; complete 16.7%
  15. 15 Gemma 3 27B non-thinking; complete 15.8%
  16. 16 Qwen2.5-VL-32B non-thinking; complete 15.4%
  17. 17 GPT-4.1 mini non-thinking; complete 14.6%
  18. 18 InternVL3.5-30B-A3B non-thinking; complete 11.7%
  19. 19 GPT-4o (snapshot unspecified) non-thinking; complete 9.90%
  20. 20 Qwen2.5-VL-7B non-thinking; complete 8.90%
  21. 21 BAGEL non-thinking; complete 8.30%
  22. 22 BAGEL-Zebra-CoT non-thinking; complete 8.00%

Source: Official MathCanvas-Bench leaderboard

#EntryScoreSettingDateSource
1 Gemini-2.5-Pro (snapshot unspecified) 47.9% thinking; complete Oct 2025 Official leaderboard
2 Seed1.6-Thinking 44.1% thinking; complete Jun 2025 Official leaderboard
3 GPT-5 43.5% thinking; complete Aug 2025 Official leaderboard
4 Qwen3-VL-Plus 40.9% thinking; complete Sep 2025 Official leaderboard
5 Gemini-2.5-Flash (snapshot unspecified) 39.3% thinking; complete Oct 2025 Official leaderboard
6 GLM-4.5V 35.6% thinking; complete Aug 2025 Official leaderboard
7 Nano-Banana 33.2% non-thinking; complete Oct 2025 Official leaderboard
8 Claude Sonnet 4 25% thinking; complete May 2025 Official leaderboard
9 BAGEL-Canvas 21.9% non-thinking; complete Oct 2025 Official leaderboard
10 Gemini 2.0 Flash Feb 2025 21.2% non-thinking; complete Feb 2025 Official leaderboard
11 Qwen2.5-VL-72B 21.1% non-thinking; complete Jan 2025 Official leaderboard
12 GPT-4.1 19% non-thinking; complete Apr 2025 Official leaderboard
13 Keye-VL-1.5-8B 17.1% thinking; complete Aug 2025 Official leaderboard
14 InternVL3.5-8B 16.7% non-thinking; complete Aug 2025 Official leaderboard
15 Gemma 3 27B 15.8% non-thinking; complete Mar 2025 Official leaderboard
16 Qwen2.5-VL-32B 15.4% non-thinking; complete Mar 2025 Official leaderboard
17 GPT-4.1 mini 14.6% non-thinking; complete Apr 2025 Official leaderboard
18 InternVL3.5-30B-A3B 11.7% non-thinking; complete Aug 2025 Official leaderboard
19 GPT-4o (snapshot unspecified) 9.90% non-thinking; complete Oct 2025 Official leaderboard
20 Qwen2.5-VL-7B 8.90% non-thinking; complete Jan 2025 Official leaderboard
21 BAGEL 8.30% non-thinking; complete Oct 2025 Official leaderboard
22 BAGEL-Zebra-CoT 8.00% non-thinking; complete Oct 2025 Official leaderboard
#ModelScoreSettingDateSource
1 Seed2.0 Pro 61.9% Feb 2026 Lab model card
2 Seed1.6-Thinking 44.1% thinking; complete Jun 2025 Official leaderboard
3 GPT-5 43.5% thinking; complete Aug 2025 Official leaderboard
4 Qwen3-VL-Plus 40.9% thinking; complete Sep 2025 Official leaderboard
5 GLM-4.5V 35.6% thinking; complete Aug 2025 Official leaderboard
6 Claude Sonnet 4 25% thinking; complete May 2025 Official leaderboard
7 Gemini 2.0 Flash Feb 2025 21.2% non-thinking; complete Feb 2025 Official leaderboard
8 Qwen2.5-VL-72B 21.1% non-thinking; complete Jan 2025 Official leaderboard
9 GPT-4.1 19% non-thinking; complete Apr 2025 Official leaderboard
10 Keye-VL-1.5-8B 17.1% thinking; complete Aug 2025 Official leaderboard
11 InternVL3.5-8B 16.7% non-thinking; complete Aug 2025 Official leaderboard
12 Gemma 3 27B 15.8% non-thinking; complete Mar 2025 Official leaderboard
13 Qwen2.5-VL-32B 15.4% non-thinking; complete Mar 2025 Official leaderboard
14 GPT-4.1 mini 14.6% non-thinking; complete Apr 2025 Official leaderboard
15 InternVL3.5-30B-A3B 11.7% non-thinking; complete Aug 2025 Official leaderboard
16 Qwen2.5-VL-7B 8.90% non-thinking; complete Jan 2025 Official leaderboard
17 BAGEL 8.30% non-thinking; complete Oct 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 October 2025

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

ByteDance Seed
Own leaderboard Not tested since Oct 2025

Source: Official MathCanvas-Bench 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%) Seed2.0 Pro Seed1.6-Thinking Claude Sonnet 4 Gemini 2.0 Flash 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2025 2026 Near the ceiling (85%) Seed2.0 Pro Seed1.6-Thinking

Sources: Official MathCanvas-Bench leaderboard and labs’ model cards

Labs headline it less often now, last in February 2026

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
DateLaunch postScoreAs the post writes it
Feb 14, 2026 Seed2.0 Pro 61.9 MathCanvas

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
Feb 14, 2026 Seed2.0 Pro model card 61.9 MathCanvas, complete accuracy (Table 8) 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%