MMLongBench-Doc
Models answer 1,062 questions about 130 long PDF documents averaging 49 pages, and some questions are unanswerable. Scoring is accuracy and F1.
- Made by
- Yubo Ma et al.
- Released
- July 2024
- Kind
- Documents, charts and text in images
- Level
- University
- Scored
- Checked automatically
- Answers
- Short answer
- Tasks
- All public
- Strongest model tested
-
Gemini 3 Pro #55 on the capability index
- Last in a launch post
- October 2026, dropped before it saturated
- Last model added
- October 2026
- Scores refreshed
- November 12th, 2026
In the authors’ words
Understanding documents with rich layouts and multi-modal components is a long-standing and practical task. Recent Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs) have made remarkable strides in various tasks, particularly in single-page document understanding (DU). However, their abilities on long-context DU remain an open problem. This work presents MMLongBench-Doc, a long-context, multi-modal benchmark comprising 1,062 expert-annotated questions. Distinct from previous datasets, it is constructed upon 130 lengthy PDF-formatted documents with an average of 49.4 pages and 20,971 textual tokens. Towards comprehensive evaluation, answers to these questions rely on pieces of evidence from (1) different sources (text, image, chart, table, and layout structure) and (2) various locations (i.e. page number). Moreover, 33.2% of the questions are cross-page questions requiring evidence across multiple pages. 22.8% of the questions are designed to be unanswerable for detecting potential hallucinations. Experiments on 14 LVLMs demonstrate that long-context DU greatly challenges current models. Notably, the best-performing model, GPT-4o, achieves an F1 score of only 42.7%, while the second-best, GPT-4V, scores 31.4%. Furthermore, 12 LVLMs (all except GPT-4o and GPT-4V) even present worse performance than their LLM counterparts which are fed with lossy-parsed OCR documents. These results validate the necessity of future research toward more capable long-context LVLMs. Project Page: https://mayubo2333.github.io/MMLongBench-Doc
Nemotron 3.5 Super VL leads with 66.6%
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.
Nemotron 3.5 Super VL leads with 66.6%, 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.
- 66.6
Nemotron 3.5 Super VL
- 61.9 Claude Opus 4.5
- 61.5
Qwen3.5 397B-A17B
- 60.5
Gemini 3 Pro
- 58.3 OriOn-Qwen-SR1
- 57.6
Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B-A3B
- 57.0
Qwen3-VL-235B-A22B-Instruct
- 56.2
Qwen3-VL-235B-A22B
- 56.1 TeleMM-2.0
- 54.9 GLM-4.6V
- 49.7 GPT-4.1
- 46.3 GPT-4o
- 44.7 GLM-4.5V
- 42.4 GLM-4.1V-9B-Thinking
- 42.1 Kimi-VL-A3B-Thinking-2506
- 35.2
Qwen2.5-VL-72B
- 35.1 Kimi-VL-A3B-Instruct
- 32.5 MiniMax-VL-01
- 28.3 Aria
- 25.1
Qwen2.5-VL-7B
- 1
Nemotron 3.5 Super VL VL; 12B activated (120B total) 66.6%
- 2 Claude Opus 4.5 VL; - 61.9%
- 3
Qwen3.5 397B-A17B VL; 17B activated (397B total) 61.5%
- 4
Gemini 3 Pro VL; - 60.5%
- 5 OriOn-Qwen-SR1 VL; 32B 58.3%
- 6
Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B-A3B Omni; 3B activated (30B total) 57.6%
- 7
Qwen3-VL-235B-A22B-Instruct VL; 22B activated (235B total) 57%
- 8
Qwen3-VL-235B-A22B VL; 22B activated (235B total) 56.2%
- 9 TeleMM-2.0 VL; - 56.1%
- 10 GLM-4.6V VL; 12B activated (106B total) 54.9%
- 11 GPT-4.1 VL; -; detail high 49.7%
- 12 GPT-4o Nov 2024, Omni; -; detail high 46.3%
- 13 GLM-4.5V VL; 12B activated (106B total) 44.7%
- 14 GLM-4.1V-9B-Thinking VL; 9B 42.4%
- 15 Kimi-VL-A3B-Thinking-2506 VL; 2.8B activated (16B total) 42.1%
- 16
Qwen2.5-VL-72B VL; 72B 35.2%
- 17 Kimi-VL-A3B-Instruct VL; 2.8B activated (16B total) 35.1%
- 18 MiniMax-VL-01 VL; 45.9B activated (456B total) 32.5%
- 19 Aria VL; 3.9B activated (25.3B total) 28.3%
- 20
Qwen2.5-VL-7B VL; 7B 25.1%
Source: Official MMLongBench-Doc leaderboard
- 66.6
Nemotron 3.5 Super VL
- 62.0
Qwen 3.6 Plus
- 61.9 Claude Opus 4.5
- 61.5
Qwen3.5 397B-A17B
- 61.4
Seed2.0 Pro
- 60.5
Gemini 3 Pro
- 60.2
Qwen3.5-27B
- 59.5
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B
- 59.0
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- 57.7
Qwen3.5-9B
- 57.6
Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B-A3B
- 57.5
Qwen3.5-Omni-Plus
- 57.0
Qwen3-VL-235B-A22B-Instruct
- 56.2
Qwen3-VL-235B-A22B
- 54.9 GLM-4.6V
- 54.2
Qwen3.5-4B
- 49.7 GPT-4.1
- 46.3 GPT-4o
- 45.4
Qwen3.5-2B
- 44.7 GLM-4.5V
- 42.4 GLM-4.1V-9B-Thinking
- 42.1 Kimi-VL-A3B-Thinking-2506
- 35.2
Qwen2.5-VL-72B
- 35.1 Kimi-VL-A3B-Instruct
- 33.6
Qwen3.5-0.8B
- 32.1
Nemotron Nano 12B v2 VL
- 28.3 Aria
- 25.1
Qwen2.5-VL-7B
- 1
Nemotron 3.5 Super VL VL; 12B activated (120B total) 66.6%
- 2
Qwen 3.6 Plus 62%
- 3 Claude Opus 4.5 VL; - 61.9%
- 4
Qwen3.5 397B-A17B VL; 17B activated (397B total) 61.5%
- 5
Seed2.0 Pro 61.4%
- 6
Gemini 3 Pro VL; - 60.5%
- 7
Qwen3.5-27B 60.2%
- 8
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B 59.5%
- 9
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B 59%
- 10
Qwen3.5-9B 57.7%
- 11
Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B-A3B Omni; 3B activated (30B total) 57.6%
- 12
Qwen3.5-Omni-Plus 57.5%
- 13
Qwen3-VL-235B-A22B-Instruct VL; 22B activated (235B total) 57%
- 14
Qwen3-VL-235B-A22B VL; 22B activated (235B total) 56.2%
- 15 GLM-4.6V VL; 12B activated (106B total) 54.9%
- 16
Qwen3.5-4B 54.2%
- 17 GPT-4.1 VL; -; detail high 49.7%
- 18 GPT-4o Nov 2024, Omni; -; detail high 46.3%
- 19
Qwen3.5-2B 45.4%
- 20 GLM-4.5V VL; 12B activated (106B total) 44.7%
- 21 GLM-4.1V-9B-Thinking VL; 9B 42.4%
- 22 Kimi-VL-A3B-Thinking-2506 VL; 2.8B activated (16B total) 42.1%
- 23
Qwen2.5-VL-72B VL; 72B 35.2%
- 24 Kimi-VL-A3B-Instruct VL; 2.8B activated (16B total) 35.1%
- 25
Qwen3.5-0.8B 33.6%
- 26
Nemotron Nano 12B v2 VL 32.1%
- 27 Aria VL; 3.9B activated (25.3B total) 28.3%
- 28
Qwen2.5-VL-7B VL; 7B 25.1%
Sources: Official MMLongBench-Doc leaderboard and labs’ model cards
| # | Entry | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | | 66.6% | VL; 12B activated (120B total) | Oct 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 2 | Claude Opus 4.5 | 61.9% | VL; - | Nov 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 3 | | 61.5% | VL; 17B activated (397B total) | Feb 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 4 | | 60.5% | VL; - | Nov 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 5 | OriOn-Qwen-SR1 | 58.3% | VL; 32B | Official leaderboard | |
| 6 | | 57.6% | Omni; 3B activated (30B total) | Apr 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 7 | | 57% | VL; 22B activated (235B total) | Sep 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 8 | | 56.2% | VL; 22B activated (235B total) | Sep 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 9 | TeleMM-2.0 | 56.1% | VL; - | Official leaderboard | |
| 10 | GLM-4.6V | 54.9% | VL; 12B activated (106B total) | Dec 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 11 | GPT-4.1 | 49.7% | VL; -; detail high | Apr 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 12 | GPT-4o Nov 2024 | 46.3% | Omni; -; detail high | Nov 2024 | Official leaderboard |
| 13 | GLM-4.5V | 44.7% | VL; 12B activated (106B total) | Aug 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 14 | GLM-4.1V-9B-Thinking | 42.4% | VL; 9B | Jul 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 15 | Kimi-VL-A3B-Thinking-2506 | 42.1% | VL; 2.8B activated (16B total) | Jun 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 16 | | 35.2% | VL; 72B | Jan 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 17 | Kimi-VL-A3B-Instruct | 35.1% | VL; 2.8B activated (16B total) | Apr 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 18 | MiniMax-VL-01 | 32.5% | VL; 45.9B activated (456B total) | Official leaderboard | |
| 19 | Aria | 28.3% | VL; 3.9B activated (25.3B total) | Sep 2024 | Official leaderboard |
| 20 | | 25.1% | VL; 7B | Jan 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| # | Model | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | | 66.6% | VL; 12B activated (120B total) | Oct 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 2 | | 62% | Apr 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 3 | Claude Opus 4.5 | 61.9% | VL; - | Nov 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 4 | | 61.5% | VL; 17B activated (397B total) | Feb 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 5 | | 61.4% | Feb 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 6 | | 60.5% | VL; - | Nov 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 7 | | 60.2% | Feb 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 8 | | 59.5% | Feb 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 9 | | 59% | Feb 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 10 | | 57.7% | Mar 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 11 | | 57.6% | Omni; 3B activated (30B total) | Apr 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 12 | | 57.5% | Mar 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 13 | | 57% | VL; 22B activated (235B total) | Sep 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 14 | | 56.2% | VL; 22B activated (235B total) | Sep 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 15 | GLM-4.6V | 54.9% | VL; 12B activated (106B total) | Dec 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 16 | | 54.2% | Mar 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 17 | GPT-4.1 | 49.7% | VL; -; detail high | Apr 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 18 | GPT-4o Nov 2024 | 46.3% | Omni; -; detail high | Nov 2024 | Official leaderboard |
| 19 | | 45.4% | Mar 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 20 | GLM-4.5V | 44.7% | VL; 12B activated (106B total) | Aug 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 21 | GLM-4.1V-9B-Thinking | 42.4% | VL; 9B | Jul 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 22 | Kimi-VL-A3B-Thinking-2506 | 42.1% | VL; 2.8B activated (16B total) | Jun 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 23 | | 35.2% | VL; 72B | Jan 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 24 | Kimi-VL-A3B-Instruct | 35.1% | VL; 2.8B activated (16B total) | Apr 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 25 | | 33.6% | Mar 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 26 | | 32.1% | Nov 2025 | Lab model card | |
| 27 | Aria | 28.3% | VL; 3.9B activated (25.3B total) | Sep 2024 | Official leaderboard |
| 28 | | 25.1% | VL; 7B | Jan 2025 | Official leaderboard |
Labs report scores for 19 models in their cards. Switch the scores above to rank them together.
7 models have held number one on the official leaderboard since its release in July 2024 8 models have held number one with claims included since its release in July 2024
Lab claims count from the day the card came out, independent runs from the model’s release. We draw one row each for the benchmark’s own leaderboard and what labs claim in their cards.
Sources: Official MMLongBench-Doc leaderboard and labs’ model cards
Scores over time
All the scores we have, one dot each, so a model tested at several settings appears more than once.
Sources: Official MMLongBench-Doc leaderboard and labs’ model cards
Labs headline it less often now, last in October 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.
| Date | Launch post | Score | As the post writes it |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 15, 2026 | 62.8 | MMLongBench-Doc | |
| Apr 28, 2026 | 57.5 | MMlongBench Doc | |
| Apr 2, 2026 | 62 | MMLongBench-Doc | |
| Mar 30, 2026 | 57.5 | MMLongBench-Doc | |
| Mar 2, 2026 | 33.6 | MMLongBench-Doc 33.6/28.1 (with CI / without CI) | |
| Mar 2, 2026 | 45.4 | MMLongBench-Doc 45.4/38.8 (with CI / without CI) | |
| Mar 2, 2026 | 54.2 | MMLongBench-Doc | |
| Mar 2, 2026 | 57.7 | MMLongBench-Doc | |
| Feb 24, 2026 | 59.5 | MMLongBench-Doc | |
| Feb 24, 2026 | 60.2 | MMLongBench-Doc | |
| Feb 24, 2026 | 59 | MMLongBench-Doc | |
| Feb 16, 2026 | 61.5 | MMLongBench-Doc | |
| Feb 14, 2026 | 61.4 | MMLongBench-Doc | |
| Dec 8, 2025 | GLM-4.6V | 54.9 | MMLongBench-Doc |
| Sep 23, 2025 | 56.2 | MMLongBench-Doc | |
| Aug 11, 2025 | GLM-4.5V | 44.7 | MMLongBench-Doc |
| Jul 1, 2025 | GLM-4.1V-9B-Thinking | 42.4 | MMLongBench-Doc |
| Jun 21, 2025 | Kimi-VL-A3B-Thinking-2506 | 42.1 | MMLongBench-DOC (Acc) |
10 system cards report it, from 5 labs
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.
| Date | Document | Score | As the document writes it | Section |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 15, 2026 | | 62.8 | MMLongBench-Doc (Table 10) | Capabilities |
| Apr 27, 2026 | | 57.5 | MMLongBench-Doc, reasoning on, 46.1 reasoning off (Table 7) | Capabilities |
| Apr 17, 2026 | | 57.5 | MMLongBench-Doc (Table 6) | Capabilities |
| Feb 14, 2026 | | 61.4 | MMLongBench-Doc (Table 8) | Capabilities |
| Jan 1, 2026 | GLM-4.6V technical report | 54.9 | MMLongBench-Doc, GLM-4.6V thinking (Table 2) | Capabilities |
| Nov 26, 2025 | | 56.2 | MMLongBenchDoc (Table 2) | Capabilities |
| Nov 6, 2025 | | 32.1 | MMLongBench-Doc, reasoning off only (Table 3) | Capabilities |
| Aug 13, 2025 | GLM-4.5V technical report | 44.7 | MMLongBench-Doc, GLM-4.5V thinking (Table 2) | Capabilities |
| Jul 1, 2025 | GLM-4.1V-9B-Thinking technical report | 42.4 | MMLongBench-Doc, GLM-4.1V-9B-Thinking thinking (Table 2) | Capabilities |
| Jun 23, 2025 | Kimi-VL-A3B-Thinking-2506 technical report | 42.1 | MMLongBench-Doc (Acc) (Table 5) | Capabilities |
8 lab claims 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. 7 of them match, which usually means one side copied the other. Every benchmark.
| Model | Lab says | Board says | Gap |
|---|---|---|---|
| | 62.8% MMLongBench-Doc | 66.6% Leaderboard, VL; 12B activated (120B total) | −3.8 pts |
| | 57.5% MMlongBench Doc | 57.6% Leaderboard, Omni; 3B activated (30B total) | Same |
| Kimi-VL-A3B-Thinking-2506 | 42.1% MMLongBench-DOC (Acc) | 42.1% Leaderboard, VL; 2.8B activated (16B total) | Same |
| GLM-4.1V-9B-Thinking | 42.4% MMLongBench-Doc | 42.4% Leaderboard, VL; 9B | Same |
| GLM-4.5V | 44.7% MMLongBench-Doc | 44.7% Leaderboard, VL; 12B activated (106B total) | Same |
| | 56.2% MMLongBench-Doc | 56.2% Leaderboard, VL; 22B activated (235B total) | Same |
| GLM-4.6V | 54.9% MMLongBench-Doc | 54.9% Leaderboard, VL; 12B activated (106B total) | Same |
| | 61.5% MMLongBench-Doc | 61.5% Leaderboard, VL; 17B activated (397B total) | Same |
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%