Omni-Cloze
Models write detailed captions of audio, visual and audio-visual clips. A cloze test on the caption content scores the detail.
Released with the Omni-Captioner paper. Qwen3.5-Omni and Qwen3.8-Omni-Flash report it.
- Released
- October 2025
- Kind
- Video captioning
- Level
- Everyday
- Scored
- Checked automatically
- Answers
- Short answer
- Tasks
- All public
- Strongest model tested
-
Gemini 3.1 Pro #39 on the capability index
- Last in a launch post
- September 2026, dropped before it saturated
- Last model added
- September 2026
- Scores refreshed
- November 12th, 2026
In the authors’ words
Fine-grained perception of multimodal information is critical for advancing human-AI interaction. With recent progress in audio-visual technologies, Omni Language Models (OLMs), capable of processing audio and video signals in parallel, have emerged as a promising paradigm for achieving richer understanding and reasoning. However, their capacity to capture and describe fine-grained details remains limited explored. In this work, we present a systematic and comprehensive investigation of omni detailed perception from the perspectives of the data pipeline, models, and benchmark. We first identify an inherent "co-growth" between detail and hallucination in current OLMs. To address this, we propose Omni-Detective, an agentic data generation pipeline integrating tool-calling, to autonomously produce highly detailed yet minimally hallucinatory multimodal data. Based on the data generated with Omni-Detective, we train two captioning models: Audio-Captioner for audio-only detailed perception, and Omni-Captioner for audio-visual detailed perception. Under the cascade evaluation protocol, Audio-Captioner achieves the best performance on MMAU and MMAR among all open-source models, surpassing Gemini 2.5 Flash and delivering performance comparable to Gemini 2.5 Pro. On existing detailed captioning benchmarks, Omni-Captioner sets a new state-of-the-art on VDC and achieves the best trade-off between detail and hallucination on the video-SALMONN 2 testset. Given the absence of a dedicated benchmark for omni detailed perception, we design Omni-Cloze, a novel cloze-style evaluation for detailed audio, visual, and audio-visual captioning that ensures stable, efficient, and reliable assessment. Experimental results and analysis demonstrate the effectiveness of Omni-Detective in generating high-quality detailed captions, as well as the superiority of Omni-Cloze in evaluating such detailed captions.
Qwen3.5-Omni-Plus leads with 64.8% among models released by September 2026
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.
Qwen3.5-Omni-Plus leads with 64.8% across all independent runs
Best score per model across the official leaderboard, Epoch AI’s own runs and any board Epoch AI copied. Each bar and row names its source.
Qwen3.5-Omni-Plus leads with 64.8%, 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 September 2026, and nobody has reported 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
- Claude Opus 5.5
- GPT-6.1 Sol
- and 16 more
- 1
Qwen3.5-Omni-Plus 64.8%
- 2
Qwen3.8-Omni-Flash 63.2%
- 3
Qwen3.5-Omni-Flash 63%
Source: Labs’ model cards
- 1
Qwen3.5-Omni-Plus 64.8%
- 2
Qwen3.5-Omni-Flash 63%
- 3
Gemini 3.1 Pro 57.2%
Source: Official Omni-Cloze leaderboard
- 1
Qwen3.5-Omni-Plus 64.8%
- 2
Qwen3.8-Omni-Flash 63.2%
- 3
Qwen3.5-Omni-Flash 63%
- 4
Gemini 3.1 Pro 57.2%
Sources: Official Omni-Cloze leaderboard and labs’ model cards
| # | Model | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | | 64.8% | Mar 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 2 | | 63.2% | Sep 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 3 | | 63% | Mar 2026 | Lab model card |
| # | Model | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | | 64.8% | Mar 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 2 | | 63% | Mar 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 3 | | 57.2% | Feb 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| # | Model | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | | 64.8% | Mar 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 2 | | 63.2% | Sep 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 3 | | 63% | Mar 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 4 | | 57.2% | Feb 2026 | Official leaderboard |
The benchmark's own leaderboard has 3 models. Switch the scores above to rank them together.
Number one over time 2 models have held number one across all independent runs since its release in October 2025 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. We draw one row each for the benchmark’s own leaderboard and what labs claim in their cards.
Sources: Official Omni-Cloze 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 Omni-Cloze leaderboard and labs’ model cards
Labs headline it less often now, last in September 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 18, 2026 | 63.2 | OmniCloze Audio-Visual Caption | |
| Mar 30, 2026 | 63 | Omni-Cloze, Qwen3.5-Omni-Flash | |
| Mar 30, 2026 | 64.8 | Omni-Cloze |
2 system cards report it, from 1 lab
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 22, 2026 | | 63.2 | OmniCloze (Table 5) | Capabilities |
| Apr 17, 2026 | | 64.8 | Omni-Cloze (Table 7) | Capabilities |
2 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. 2 of them match, which usually means one side copied the other. Every benchmark.
| Model | Lab says | Board says | Gap |
|---|---|---|---|
| | 64.8% Omni-Cloze | 64.8% Leaderboard | Same |
| | 63% Omni-Cloze, Qwen3.5-Omni-Flash | 63% Leaderboard | Same |
More in Audio and video
- Video-MMMU In use 300 expert-level lecture videos with questions testing perception, comprehension and adaptation of knowledge. Accuracy.
Qwen 3.8 Max 88.7%
- LVBench In use Hours-long video understanding with multiple-choice questions on reasoning, grounding and summarization.
Gemini 4 Argon 91.7%
- MMVU In use 3,000 expert-annotated questions on videos across 27 disciplines. Multiple-choice and open-ended accuracy.
Qwen 3.8 Max 82.4%
- MLVU In use Multi-task long video understanding (minutes to hours) with multiple-choice and generation tasks. Accuracy.
Qwen 3.8 Max 90.8%
- FLEURS In use Models transcribe read speech in 102 languages built from FLoRes-101 sentences. Model cards usually report word error rate, so lower scores are better.
Phi-4-multimodal 4.00%
- VoiceBench In use Spoken instructions with speaker, environment and content variation. Voice assistant responses scored by GPT judge or rules.
Qwen3.5-Omni-Plus 93.1%