Benchmark Almanac

OVO-S-Bench

Gemini 3.1 Pro 59.2% leads since June 2026
Not in model cards

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.

Abstract of OVO-S-Bench: A Hierarchical Benchmark for Streaming Spatial Intelligence in Multimodal LLMs (arXiv:2606.03890, CC0)
37
Entries on its own leaderboard, 15 models we track

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:

  1. 1 Gemini 3.1 Pro 59.2%
  2. 2 Qwen3-VL-235B-A22B 53.6%
  3. 3 Qwen3.5 397B-A17B 52.1%
  4. 4 Qwen3.5-27B 51.7%
  5. 5 InternVL3.5-241B-A28B 50.9%
  6. 6 GPT-5.4 50.9%
  7. 7 Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite 50.8%
  8. 8 InternVL3.5-38B 49.1%
  9. 9 Qwen3-VL-32B 48.8%
  10. 10 Qwen3-VL-4B 46.8%
  11. 11 RynnBrain-8B 46.4%
  12. 12 Qwen3.5-9B 45.9%
  13. 13 Qwen3.5-4B 45.4%
  14. 14 FluxMem-7B 44.7%
  15. 15 HERMES-7B 44.6%
  16. 16 InternVL3.5-8B 44.6%
  17. 17 Qwen2.5-VL-7B 44.2%
  18. 18 StreamForest-7B 44.1%
  19. 19 Grok 4.1 Fast 43.7%
  20. 20 RoboBrain2.5-NV-8B 43.6%
  21. 21 VeBrain-7B 43.5%
  22. 22 GLM-4.6V-Flash 43.2%
  23. 23 StreamingVLM-7B 43%
  24. 24 Gemma 4 26B A4B 42.6%
  25. 25 VST-7B-RL 42.2%
  26. 26 VST-7B-SFT 42.2%
  27. 27 RoboBrain2.5-4B 41.8%
  28. 28 Cosmos-Reason1-7B 41.5%
  29. 29 SenseNova-SI-1.5-8B 40%
  30. 30 Gemma-4 39.7%
  31. 31 StreamingTOM-7B 39.4%
  32. 32 InfiniPot-V-7B 39.3%
  33. 33 Spatial-TTT-2B 37%
  34. 34 Cambrian-S-7B 36.8%
  35. 35 Spatial-MLLM-7B 36.4%
  36. 36 Cambrian-S-LFP-7B 34.9%
  37. 37 Flash-VStream-7B 24.9%

Source: Official OVO-S-Bench leaderboard

#EntryScoreSettingDateSource
1 Gemini 3.1 Pro 59.2% Feb 2026 Official leaderboard
2 Qwen3-VL-235B-A22B 53.6% Sep 2025 Official leaderboard
3 Qwen3.5 397B-A17B 52.1% Feb 2026 Official leaderboard
4 Qwen3.5-27B 51.7% Feb 2026 Official leaderboard
5 InternVL3.5-241B-A28B 50.9% Aug 2025 Official leaderboard
6 GPT-5.4 50.9% Mar 2026 Official leaderboard
7 Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite 50.8% Mar 2026 Official leaderboard
8 InternVL3.5-38B 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 Qwen3.5-9B 45.9% Feb 2026 Official leaderboard
13 Qwen3.5-4B 45.4% Feb 2026 Official leaderboard
14 FluxMem-7B 44.7% Official leaderboard
15 HERMES-7B 44.6% Official leaderboard
16 InternVL3.5-8B 44.6% Aug 2025 Official leaderboard
17 Qwen2.5-VL-7B 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 Gemma 4 26B A4B 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.

Google DeepMind
Own leaderboard Not tested since Jun 2026

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.

On the benchmark’s own leaderboard Best so far
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2025 2026 Near the ceiling (85%) Gemini 3.1 Pro Qwen3-VL-235B-A22B Qwen2.5-VL-7B 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2025 2026 Near the ceiling (85%) Gemini 3.1 Pro InternVL3.5-241B-A28B

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

All 233 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%