RBench
650 image+text prompts for robot video generation (tasks and embodiments). MLLM judge scores task completion, physical plausibility, stability.
MLLM-judged. GPT and Qwen judges give different scores and orders. Best GPT-judged 0.642. Later rows (e.g. Cosmos 3) were supplied by model authors.
- Made by
- Peking University DAGroup
- Released
- January 2026
- Kind
- Video world models
- Scored
- Graded by a model
- Answers
- Open-ended
- Tasks
- All public
- Last in a system card
- May 2026
- Last model added
- July 2026
- Scores refreshed
- November 12th, 2026
In the authors’ words
Video generation models have significantly advanced embodied intelligence, unlocking new possibilities for generating diverse robot data that capture perception, reasoning, and action in the physical world. However, synthesizing high-quality videos that accurately reflect real-world robotic interactions remains challenging, and the lack of a standardized benchmark limits fair comparisons and progress. To address this gap, we introduce a comprehensive robotics benchmark, RBench, designed to evaluate robot-oriented video generation across five task domains and four distinct embodiments. It assesses both task-level correctness and visual fidelity through reproducible sub-metrics, including structural consistency, physical plausibility, and action completeness. Evaluation of 25 representative models highlights significant deficiencies in generating physically realistic robot behaviors. Furthermore, the benchmark achieves a Spearman correlation coefficient of 0.96 with human evaluations, validating its effectiveness. While RBench provides the necessary lens to identify these deficiencies, achieving physical realism requires moving beyond evaluation to address the critical shortage of high-quality training data. Driven by these insights, we introduce a refined four-stage data pipeline, resulting in RoVid-X, the largest open-source robotic dataset for video generation with 4 million annotated video clips, covering thousands of tasks and enriched with comprehensive physical property annotations. Collectively, this synergistic ecosystem of evaluation and data establishes a robust foundation for rigorous assessment and scalable training of video models, accelerating the evolution of embodied AI toward general intelligence.
WEAVE-0.5 tops the leaderboard with 64.2%
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 best model we track is Wan 2.6, at 60.7%.
The newest model with a score here came out in July 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
- 64.2 WEAVE-0.5
- 62.0 LingBot-Video
- 60.7
Wan 2.6
- 58.4
Seedance v1.5 Pro
- 58.4
Cosmos3-Nano
- 58.1 Cosmos3-Super
- 57.0
Wan 2.5 Preview
- 56.5 Hailuo v2
- 56.3
Veo 3
- 55.1 Seedance 1.0
- 55.1
Cosmos3-Edge
- 53.4
Kling 2.6 Pro
- 50.7
Wan 2.2 A14B
- 46.4 Cosmos 2.5
- 46.0
HunyuanVideo 1.5
- 43.7 LongCat-Video
- 42.0 DreamGen(gr1)
- 40.5 DreamGen(droid)
- 39.9 Wan2.1_14B
- 38.1 LTX-2 19B
- 38.0 Wan2.2_5B
- 36.2 Sora 2 Pro
- 36.1 SkyReels
- 34.4 LTX-Video
- 33.9 FramePack
- 30.3 HunyuanVideo
- 26.6 Sora
- 25.6 CogVideoX_5B
- 20.6 Vidar
- 12.3 UnifoLM-WMA-0
- 1 WEAVE-0.5 GPT judge 64.2%
- 2 LingBot-Video GPT judge 62%
- 3
Wan 2.6 GPT judge 60.7%
- 4
Seedance v1.5 Pro GPT judge 58.4%
- 5
Cosmos3-Nano GPT judge 58.4%
- 6 Cosmos3-Super GPT judge 58.1%
- 7
Wan 2.5 Preview GPT judge 57%
- 8 Hailuo v2 GPT judge 56.5%
- 9
Veo 3 GPT judge 56.3%
- 10 Seedance 1.0 GPT judge 55.1%
- 11
Cosmos3-Edge GPT judge 55.1%
- 12
Kling 2.6 Pro GPT judge 53.4%
- 13
Wan 2.2 A14B GPT judge 50.7%
- 14 Cosmos 2.5 GPT judge 46.4%
- 15
HunyuanVideo 1.5 GPT judge 46%
- 16 LongCat-Video GPT judge 43.7%
- 17 DreamGen(gr1) GPT judge 42%
- 18 DreamGen(droid) GPT judge 40.5%
- 19 Wan2.1_14B GPT judge 39.9%
- 20 LTX-2 19B GPT judge 38.1%
- 21 Wan2.2_5B GPT judge 38%
- 22 Sora 2 Pro GPT judge 36.2%
- 23 SkyReels GPT judge 36.1%
- 24 LTX-Video GPT judge 34.4%
- 25 FramePack GPT judge 33.9%
- 26 HunyuanVideo GPT judge 30.3%
- 27 Sora GPT judge 26.6%
- 28 CogVideoX_5B GPT judge 25.6%
- 29 Vidar GPT judge 20.6%
- 30 UnifoLM-WMA-0 GPT judge 12.3%
Source: Official RBench leaderboard
| # | Entry | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | WEAVE-0.5 | 64.2% | GPT judge | Official leaderboard | |
| 2 | LingBot-Video | 62% | GPT judge | Official leaderboard | |
| 3 | | 60.7% | GPT judge | Official leaderboard | |
| 4 | | 58.4% | GPT judge | Official leaderboard | |
| 5 | | 58.4% | GPT judge | May 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 6 | Cosmos3-Super | 58.1% | GPT judge | Official leaderboard | |
| 7 | | 57% | GPT judge | Official leaderboard | |
| 8 | Hailuo v2 | 56.5% | GPT judge | Official leaderboard | |
| 9 | | 56.3% | GPT judge | Official leaderboard | |
| 10 | Seedance 1.0 | 55.1% | GPT judge | Official leaderboard | |
| 11 | | 55.1% | GPT judge | Jul 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 12 | | 53.4% | GPT judge | Official leaderboard | |
| 13 | | 50.7% | GPT judge | Official leaderboard | |
| 14 | Cosmos 2.5 | 46.4% | GPT judge | Official leaderboard | |
| 15 | | 46% | GPT judge | Official leaderboard | |
| 16 | LongCat-Video | 43.7% | GPT judge | Official leaderboard | |
| 17 | DreamGen(gr1) | 42% | GPT judge | Official leaderboard | |
| 18 | DreamGen(droid) | 40.5% | GPT judge | Official leaderboard | |
| 19 | Wan2.1_14B | 39.9% | GPT judge | Official leaderboard | |
| 20 | LTX-2 19B | 38.1% | GPT judge | Official leaderboard | |
| 21 | Wan2.2_5B | 38% | GPT judge | Official leaderboard | |
| 22 | Sora 2 Pro | 36.2% | GPT judge | Official leaderboard | |
| 23 | SkyReels | 36.1% | GPT judge | Official leaderboard | |
| 24 | LTX-Video | 34.4% | GPT judge | Official leaderboard | |
| 25 | FramePack | 33.9% | GPT judge | Official leaderboard | |
| 26 | HunyuanVideo | 30.3% | GPT judge | Official leaderboard | |
| 27 | Sora | 26.6% | GPT judge | Official leaderboard | |
| 28 | CogVideoX_5B | 25.6% | GPT judge | Official leaderboard | |
| 29 | Vidar | 20.6% | GPT judge | Official leaderboard | |
| 30 | UnifoLM-WMA-0 | 12.3% | GPT judge | Official leaderboard |
Labs report scores for 1 model in their cards. We plot every source in the charts below.
Scores over time
All the scores we have, one dot each, so a model tested at several settings appears more than once.
Sources: Official RBench leaderboard and labs’ model cards
Labs report it only in system cards
We read the headline results of 522 launch posts from 52 labs, and none of them list this benchmark. Some system cards do, below.
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.
| Date | Document | Score | As the document writes it | Section |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 31, 2026 | | 58.4 | Cosmos3-Nano image-to-video RBench score, Table 12 | Capabilities |
One lab claim 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. 1 of them match, which usually means one side copied the other. Every benchmark.
| Model | Lab says | Board says | Gap |
|---|---|---|---|
| | 58.4% Cosmos3-Nano image-to-video RBench score, Table 12 | 58.4% Leaderboard, GPT judge | Same |
More in World models
- AgentWorldBench In use Language world models predict the next environment observation after an agent action, in 7 domains from MCP and search to Android and desktop OS. A judge model scores each prediction against the real observation on five dimensions. GPT-5.4 58.3
- IntPhys 2 In use Models watch simulated videos and judge whether each event is physically possible, testing object permanence, immutability, continuity and solidity. Scored by accuracy.
Muse Spark Open 68.3%
- QwenWorldBench Fading Models act as world models that simulate agent environments in 7 domains, such as terminal, web, and Android. A rubric judge scores five dimensions.
Qwen3.7-Plus 62.1%
- VPCT Fading Models view an image of a ball, ramps, and three buckets and predict which bucket the ball falls into. Scored by accuracy on 100 problems.
Gemini 3 Pro 91%
- ContPhy Fading Models infer physical properties such as mass and density of fluids and soft bodies from videos and predict their dynamics.
Seed2.0 Pro 67.4%
- PAI-Bench Only in system cards Physical-AI video generation from 1,044 prompts in six domains, VLM-QA plus quality metrics. Companion control and understanding tracks.
Cosmos3-Nano 83.7%