Ref-L4
Models locate the object described by a long referring expression in an image. The set has 45,341 annotations over 365 object categories, scored by box accuracy.
The authors also released cleaned RefCOCO, RefCOCO+ and RefCOCOg after finding labeling errors of 5 to 24 percent.
- Made by
- Chen et al. (Ref-L4 authors)
- Released
- June 2024
- Kind
- Detection and captioning
- Level
- Everyday
- Scored
- Checked automatically
- Answers
- Short answer
- Tasks
- All public
- Last in a launch post
- December 2025, dropped after it saturated
- Last model added
- January 2026
In the authors’ words
Referring expression comprehension (REC) involves localizing a target instance based on a textual description. Recent advancements in REC have been driven by large multimodal models (LMMs) like CogVLM, which achieved 92.44% accuracy on RefCOCO. However, this study questions whether existing benchmarks such as RefCOCO, RefCOCO+, and RefCOCOg, capture LMMs' comprehensive capabilities. We begin with a manual examination of these benchmarks, revealing high labeling error rates: 14% in RefCOCO, 24% in RefCOCO+, and 5% in RefCOCOg, which undermines the authenticity of evaluations. We address this by excluding problematic instances and reevaluating several LMMs capable of handling the REC task, showing significant accuracy improvements, thus highlighting the impact of benchmark noise. In response, we introduce Ref-L4, a comprehensive REC benchmark, specifically designed to evaluate modern REC models. Ref-L4 is distinguished by four key features: 1) a substantial sample size with 45,341 annotations; 2) a diverse range of object categories with 365 distinct types and varying instance scales from 30 to 3,767; 3) lengthy referring expressions averaging 24.2 words; and 4) an extensive vocabulary comprising 22,813 unique words. We evaluate a total of 24 large models on Ref-L4 and provide valuable insights. The cleaned versions of RefCOCO, RefCOCO+, and RefCOCOg, as well as our Ref-L4 benchmark and evaluation code, are available at https://github.com/JierunChen/Ref-L4.
GLM-4.5V leads with 89.5% among models released by December 2025
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.
The newest model with a score here came out in December 2025, 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
- GPT-6 Astra
- Claude Opus 5.5
- and 16 more
- 1 GLM-4.5V 89.5%
- 2 GLM-4.6V 88.9%
- 3 GLM-4.1V-9B-Thinking 86.8%
Source: Labs’ model cards
| # | Model | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | GLM-4.5V | 89.5% | Aug 2025 | Lab model card | |
| 2 | GLM-4.6V | 88.9% | Dec 2025 | Lab model card | |
| 3 | GLM-4.1V-9B-Thinking | 86.8% | Jul 2025 | Lab model card |
2 models have held number one in labs’ own numbers since its release in June 2024
Lab claims count from the day the card came out, independent runs from the model’s release.
Source: Labs’ model cards
Z.ai’s own number for GLM-4.1V-9B-Thinking passed 85% in July 2025
All the scores we have, one dot each, so a model tested at several settings appears more than once.
Source: Labs’ model cards
Labs headline it less often now, last in December 2025
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.
3 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 1, 2026 | GLM-4.6V technical report | 88.9 | Ref-L4-test, GLM-4.6V thinking (Table 2) | Capabilities |
| Aug 13, 2025 | GLM-4.5V technical report | 89.5 | Ref-L4-test, GLM-4.5V thinking (Table 2) | Capabilities |
| Jul 1, 2025 | GLM-4.1V-9B-Thinking technical report | 86.8 | Ref-L4-test, GLM-4.1V-9B-Thinking thinking (Table 2) | Capabilities |
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%