MeasureBench Real-world
Models read values and units from real instrument images. The score is the published overall measurement accuracy.
One track of MeasureBench. The MeasureBench record keeps lab scores that combine tracks.
- Made by
- BAAI FlagEval team
- Released
- October 2025
- Kind
- General visual questions
- Level
- Everyday
- Scored
- Checked automatically
- Answers
- Short answer
- Tasks
- All public
- Strongest model tested
- GPT-5.4 #27 on the capability index
- Last model added
- March 2026
- Scores refreshed
- November 12th, 2026
In the authors’ words
Reading measurement instruments is effortless for humans and requires relatively little domain expertise, yet it remains surprisingly challenging for current vision-language models (VLMs) as we find in preliminary evaluation. In this work, we introduce MeasureBench, a benchmark on visual measurement reading covering both real-world and synthesized images of various types of measurements, along with an extensible pipeline for data synthesis. Our pipeline procedurally generates a specified type of gauge with controllable visual appearance, enabling scalable variation in key details such as pointers, scales, fonts, lighting, and clutter. Evaluation on popular proprietary and open-weight VLMs shows that even the strongest frontier VLMs struggle with measurement reading in general. We have also conducted preliminary experiments with reinforcement finetuning (RFT) over synthetic data, and find a significant improvement on both in-domain synthetic subset and real-world images. Our analysis highlights a fundamental limitation of current VLMs in fine-grained spatial grounding. We hope this resource and our code releases can help future advances on visually grounded numeracy and precise spatial perception of VLMs, bridging the gap between recognizing numbers and measuring the world.
Seed2.0 Pro leads with 41.7% among models released by March 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.
The newest model with a score here came out in March 2026, and nobody has tested a newer one. Among the 20 highest-ranked models on the capability index, these have no score yet:
- Claude Fable 5.2
-
Gemini 4 Carbon
- GPT-6 Astra
- Claude Opus 5.5
- and 16 more
- 41.7
Seed2.0 Pro
- 36.1
Gemini 3.1 Pro
- 32.9 GPT-5.4
- 30.2 Gemini-2.5-Pro (snapshot unspecified)
- 22.6 Qwen3-VL-235B
- 22.0 GPT-5 mini
- 20.2 Gemini-2.5-Flash (snapshot unspecified)
- 20.1 Claude Sonnet 4.6
- 19.8 GPT-5
- 18.7 Claude Opus 4.6
- 15.3 Qwen3-VL-8B
- 14.6
Qwen2.5-VL-7B
- 14.5
Qwen2.5-VL-72B
- 14.3 Claude Opus 4.1
- 12.9
InternVL3.5-38B
- 12.6 Claude Sonnet 4
- 12.2
Llama 4 Maverick
- 11.7
Qwen2.5-VL-32B
- 10.9
Llama 4 Scout
- 10.6
Mistral Medium 3.1
- 9.70
InternVL3.5-8B
- 8.50
Mistral Small 3.2
- 7.50 Grok 4
- 1
Seed2.0 Pro 41.7%
- 2
Gemini 3.1 Pro 36.1%
- 3 GPT-5.4 32.9%
- 4 Gemini-2.5-Pro (snapshot unspecified) 30.2%
- 5 Qwen3-VL-235B 22.6%
- 6 GPT-5 mini 22%
- 7 Gemini-2.5-Flash (snapshot unspecified) 20.2%
- 8 Claude Sonnet 4.6 20.1%
- 9 GPT-5 19.8%
- 10 Claude Opus 4.6 18.7%
- 11 Qwen3-VL-8B 15.3%
- 12
Qwen2.5-VL-7B 14.6%
- 13
Qwen2.5-VL-72B 14.5%
- 14 Claude Opus 4.1 14.3%
- 15
InternVL3.5-38B 12.9%
- 16 Claude Sonnet 4 12.6%
- 17
Llama 4 Maverick 12.2%
- 18
Qwen2.5-VL-32B 11.7%
- 19
Llama 4 Scout 10.9%
- 20
Mistral Medium 3.1 10.6%
- 21
InternVL3.5-8B 9.70%
- 22
Mistral Small 3.2 8.50%
- 23 Grok 4 7.50%
Source: Official MeasureBench Real-world leaderboard
| # | Entry | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | | 41.7% | Feb 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 2 | | 36.1% | Feb 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 3 | GPT-5.4 | 32.9% | Mar 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 4 | Gemini-2.5-Pro (snapshot unspecified) | 30.2% | Official leaderboard | ||
| 5 | Qwen3-VL-235B | 22.6% | Official leaderboard | ||
| 6 | GPT-5 mini | 22% | Aug 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 7 | Gemini-2.5-Flash (snapshot unspecified) | 20.2% | Official leaderboard | ||
| 8 | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | 20.1% | Feb 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 9 | GPT-5 | 19.8% | Aug 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 10 | Claude Opus 4.6 | 18.7% | Feb 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 11 | Qwen3-VL-8B | 15.3% | Official leaderboard | ||
| 12 | | 14.6% | Jan 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 13 | | 14.5% | Jan 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 14 | Claude Opus 4.1 | 14.3% | Aug 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 15 | | 12.9% | Aug 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 16 | Claude Sonnet 4 | 12.6% | May 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 17 | | 12.2% | Apr 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 18 | | 11.7% | Mar 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 19 | | 10.9% | Apr 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 20 | | 10.6% | Aug 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 21 | | 9.70% | Aug 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 22 | | 8.50% | Jun 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 23 | Grok 4 | 7.50% | Jul 2025 | Official leaderboard |
2 models have held number one on the official leaderboard since its release in October 2025
Lab claims count from the day the card came out, independent runs from the model’s release.
Source: Official MeasureBench Real-world leaderboard
Scores over time
All the scores we have, one dot each, so a model tested at several settings appears more than once.
Source: Official MeasureBench Real-world 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
- 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%