OVO-S-Bench
Multimodal models answer spatial questions about places and layouts during a continuous egocentric video stream. The set has 1,680 human-annotated questions over 348 videos.
It had 31 Hugging Face paper upvotes and 61 GitHub stars. It is separate from OVO-Bench.
- Released
- June 2026
- Kind
- Video understanding
- Level
- Everyday
- Scored
- Checked automatically
- Answers
- Multiple choice
- Tasks
- All public
- Strongest model tested
- GPT-5.4 #27 on the capability index
- Last model added
- April 2026
- Scores refreshed
- November 12th, 2026
In the authors’ words
Multimodal agents in robotics, AR, and autonomous driving must reason about places and layouts from continuous egocentric streams, often using evidence outside the current view. Existing benchmarks either evaluate offline over full videos or target events rather than spatial structure. We introduce OVO-S-Bench, a fully human-annotated benchmark for streaming spatial intelligence, comprising 1,680 questions over 348 source videos. Annotation involves 12 trained annotators (each also serving as a blind cross-reviewer) across roughly 804 person-hours of multi-round quality assurance. Each question carries a query timestamp and an evidence interval, and at evaluation, the model sees only the prefix preceding the query. Questions span four levels of increasing abstraction: instantaneous egocentric perception, spatiotemporal context tracking, generative spatial reasoning, and allocentric spatial mapping. Across 38 proprietary and open-source MLLMs, Gemini-3.1-Pro trails human experts evaluated under the same prefix-access protocol by 33 points (59.2 vs. 92.2), with allocentric spatial mapping as the dominant bottleneck. Notably, streaming and spatially fine-tuned MLLMs underperform their own backbones. We further find that chain-of-thought reasoning amplifies spatial errors when ungrounded in the stream. By exposing these limitations, OVO-S-Bench establishes a demanding testbed for next-generation streaming spatial MLLMs.
Gemini 3.1 Pro leads with 59.2% among models released by April 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 April 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
- 59.2
Gemini 3.1 Pro
- 53.6
Qwen3-VL-235B-A22B
- 52.1
Qwen3.5 397B-A17B
- 51.7
Qwen3.5-27B
- 50.9
InternVL3.5-241B-A28B
- 50.9 GPT-5.4
- 50.8
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite
- 49.1
InternVL3.5-38B
- 48.8 Qwen3-VL-32B
- 46.8 Qwen3-VL-4B
- 46.4 RynnBrain-8B
- 45.9
Qwen3.5-9B
- 45.4
Qwen3.5-4B
- 44.7 FluxMem-7B
- 44.6 HERMES-7B
- 44.6
InternVL3.5-8B
- 44.2
Qwen2.5-VL-7B
- 44.1 StreamForest-7B
- 43.7 Grok 4.1 Fast
- 43.6 RoboBrain2.5-NV-8B
- 43.5 VeBrain-7B
- 43.2 GLM-4.6V-Flash
- 43.0 StreamingVLM-7B
- 42.6
Gemma 4 26B A4B
- 42.2 VST-7B-RL
- 42.2 VST-7B-SFT
- 41.8 RoboBrain2.5-4B
- 41.5 Cosmos-Reason1-7B
- 40.0 SenseNova-SI-1.5-8B
- 39.7 Gemma-4
- 39.4 StreamingTOM-7B
- 39.3 InfiniPot-V-7B
- 37.0 Spatial-TTT-2B
- 36.8 Cambrian-S-7B
- 36.4 Spatial-MLLM-7B
- 34.9 Cambrian-S-LFP-7B
- 24.9 Flash-VStream-7B
- 1
Gemini 3.1 Pro 59.2%
- 2
Qwen3-VL-235B-A22B 53.6%
- 3
Qwen3.5 397B-A17B 52.1%
- 4
Qwen3.5-27B 51.7%
- 5
InternVL3.5-241B-A28B 50.9%
- 6 GPT-5.4 50.9%
- 7
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite 50.8%
- 8
InternVL3.5-38B 49.1%
- 9 Qwen3-VL-32B 48.8%
- 10 Qwen3-VL-4B 46.8%
- 11 RynnBrain-8B 46.4%
- 12
Qwen3.5-9B 45.9%
- 13
Qwen3.5-4B 45.4%
- 14 FluxMem-7B 44.7%
- 15 HERMES-7B 44.6%
- 16
InternVL3.5-8B 44.6%
- 17
Qwen2.5-VL-7B 44.2%
- 18 StreamForest-7B 44.1%
- 19 Grok 4.1 Fast 43.7%
- 20 RoboBrain2.5-NV-8B 43.6%
- 21 VeBrain-7B 43.5%
- 22 GLM-4.6V-Flash 43.2%
- 23 StreamingVLM-7B 43%
- 24
Gemma 4 26B A4B 42.6%
- 25 VST-7B-RL 42.2%
- 26 VST-7B-SFT 42.2%
- 27 RoboBrain2.5-4B 41.8%
- 28 Cosmos-Reason1-7B 41.5%
- 29 SenseNova-SI-1.5-8B 40%
- 30 Gemma-4 39.7%
- 31 StreamingTOM-7B 39.4%
- 32 InfiniPot-V-7B 39.3%
- 33 Spatial-TTT-2B 37%
- 34 Cambrian-S-7B 36.8%
- 35 Spatial-MLLM-7B 36.4%
- 36 Cambrian-S-LFP-7B 34.9%
- 37 Flash-VStream-7B 24.9%
Source: Official OVO-S-Bench leaderboard
| # | Entry | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | | 59.2% | Feb 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 2 | | 53.6% | Sep 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 3 | | 52.1% | Feb 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 4 | | 51.7% | Feb 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 5 | | 50.9% | Aug 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 6 | GPT-5.4 | 50.9% | Mar 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 7 | | 50.8% | Mar 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 8 | | 49.1% | Aug 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 9 | Qwen3-VL-32B | 48.8% | Official leaderboard | ||
| 10 | Qwen3-VL-4B | 46.8% | Official leaderboard | ||
| 11 | RynnBrain-8B | 46.4% | Official leaderboard | ||
| 12 | | 45.9% | Feb 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 13 | | 45.4% | Feb 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 14 | FluxMem-7B | 44.7% | Official leaderboard | ||
| 15 | HERMES-7B | 44.6% | Official leaderboard | ||
| 16 | | 44.6% | Aug 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 17 | | 44.2% | Jan 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 18 | StreamForest-7B | 44.1% | Official leaderboard | ||
| 19 | Grok 4.1 Fast | 43.7% | Nov 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 20 | RoboBrain2.5-NV-8B | 43.6% | Official leaderboard | ||
| 21 | VeBrain-7B | 43.5% | Official leaderboard | ||
| 22 | GLM-4.6V-Flash | 43.2% | Dec 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 23 | StreamingVLM-7B | 43% | Official leaderboard | ||
| 24 | | 42.6% | Apr 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 25 | VST-7B-RL | 42.2% | Official leaderboard | ||
| 26 | VST-7B-SFT | 42.2% | Official leaderboard | ||
| 27 | RoboBrain2.5-4B | 41.8% | Official leaderboard | ||
| 28 | Cosmos-Reason1-7B | 41.5% | Official leaderboard | ||
| 29 | SenseNova-SI-1.5-8B | 40% | Official leaderboard | ||
| 30 | Gemma-4 | 39.7% | Official leaderboard | ||
| 31 | StreamingTOM-7B | 39.4% | Official leaderboard | ||
| 32 | InfiniPot-V-7B | 39.3% | Official leaderboard | ||
| 33 | Spatial-TTT-2B | 37% | Official leaderboard | ||
| 34 | Cambrian-S-7B | 36.8% | Official leaderboard | ||
| 35 | Spatial-MLLM-7B | 36.4% | Official leaderboard | ||
| 36 | Cambrian-S-LFP-7B | 34.9% | Official leaderboard | ||
| 37 | Flash-VStream-7B | 24.9% | Official leaderboard |
Number one over time
Lab claims count from the day the card came out, independent runs from the model’s release.
Source: Official OVO-S-Bench 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 OVO-S-Bench 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 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%