Benchmark Almanac

MeasureBench

In use

Vision-language models read values from images of measuring instruments, such as gauges and rulers, in real and synthesized photos. Scored by matching the reading to the key.

Published at CVPR 2026. A generator makes new synthetic gauges with controlled pointers, scales and clutter.

Released
October 2025
Kind
General visual questions
Level
Everyday
Scored
Checked automatically
Answers
Short answer
Tasks
All public
Last in a launch post
June 2026
Last model added
June 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.

Abstract of Do Vision-Language Models Measure Up? Benchmarking Visual Measurement Reading with MeasureBench (arXiv:2510.26865, CC0)
1
Model scored in lab cards
1
Launch post lists it, from 1 lab
1
System card reports it, from 1 lab

Seed2.1 Pro leads with 62.9%

Best score per model as labs report them in their own cards. Labs pick their own settings, so these compare less cleanly than independent runs.

  1. 1 Seed2.1 Pro 62.9%

Source: Labs’ model cards

#ModelScoreSettingDateSource
1 Seed2.1 Pro 62.9% Jun 2026 Lab model card

Scores over time

All the scores we have, one dot each, so a model tested at several settings appears more than once.

Reported by the lab in its model card
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2026 Near the ceiling (85%) Seed2.1 Pro 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2026 Near the ceiling (85%) Seed2.1 Pro

Source: 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.

ByteDance Seed
DateLaunch postScoreAs the post writes it
Jun 23, 2026 Seed2.1 Pro 62.9 MeasureBench

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
Jun 23, 2026 Seed2.1 Pro model card 62.9 MeasureBench (Table 9) 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%