Benchmark Almanac

SAT (Spatial Aptitude Training)

GPT-4V 50.7% leads
gemini-robotics-er-1.5-preview 76.7% leads since September 2025
Only in system cards

Models answer static and dynamic spatial questions, such as how object relations change when the camera or an object moves. The real-image test set has 150 questions.

The release also has 175K simulated training questions. COLM 2025 paper. Microsoft's Mage-VL card reports it as SAT.

Released
December 2024
Kind
Spatial reasoning and counting
Level
Everyday
Scored
Checked automatically
Answers
Multiple choice
Tasks
All public
Last in a system card
September 2025
Last model added
September 2025
Scores refreshed
November 12th, 2026

In the authors’ words

Reasoning about motion and space is a fundamental cognitive capability that is required by multiple real-world applications. While many studies highlight that large multimodal language models (MLMs) struggle to reason about space, they only focus on static spatial relationships, and not dynamic awareness of motion and space, i.e., reasoning about the effect of egocentric and object motions on spatial relationships. Manually annotating such object and camera movements is expensive. Hence, we introduce SAT, a simulated spatial aptitude training dataset utilizing 3D simulators, comprising both static and dynamic spatial reasoning across 175K question-answer (QA) pairs and 20K scenes. Complementing this, we also construct a small (150 image-QAs) yet challenging dynamic spatial test set using real-world images. Leveraging our SAT datasets and 6 existing static spatial benchmarks, we systematically investigate what improves both static and dynamic spatial awareness. Our results reveal that simulations are surprisingly effective at imparting spatial aptitude to MLMs that translate to real images. We show that perfect annotations in simulation are more effective than existing approaches of pseudo-annotating real images. For instance, SAT training improves a LLaVA-13B model by an average 11% and a LLaVA-Video-7B model by an average 8% on multiple spatial benchmarks, including our real-image dynamic test set and spatial reasoning on long videos – even outperforming some large proprietary models. While reasoning over static relationships improves with synthetic training data, there is still considerable room for improvement for dynamic reasoning questions.

Abstract of SAT: Dynamic Spatial Aptitude Training for Multimodal Language Models (arXiv:2412.07755, CC0)
1
Model scored in lab cards
1
System card reports it, from 1 lab

gemini-robotics-er-1.5-preview leads with 76.7%

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.

GPT-4V leads with 50.7% 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.

gemini-robotics-er-1.5-preview leads with 76.7%, 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.

  1. 1 gemini-robotics-er-1.5-preview 76.7%

Source: Labs’ model cards

Source: Official SAT (Spatial Aptitude Training) leaderboard

Sources: Labs’ model cards and official SAT (Spatial Aptitude Training) leaderboard

#ModelScoreSettingDateSource
1 gemini-robotics-er-1.5-preview 76.7% Sep 2025 Lab model card
#ModelScoreSettingDateSource
1 GPT-4V 50.7% Nov 2023 Official leaderboard
2 LLaVA-v1.5-13B 41.6% Oct 2023 Official leaderboard
#ModelScoreSettingDateSource
1 gemini-robotics-er-1.5-preview 76.7% Sep 2025 Lab model card
2 GPT-4V 50.7% Nov 2023 Official leaderboard
3 LLaVA-v1.5-13B 41.6% Oct 2023 Official leaderboard

The benchmark's own leaderboard has 9 entries, 2 of them models we track. Switch the scores above to rank them together.

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 Reported by the lab in its model card Best so far
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2024 2025 Near the ceiling (85%) gemini-robotics-er-1.5-preview GPT-4V LLaVA-v1.5-13B 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2024 2025 Near the ceiling (85%) gemini-robotics-er-1.5-preview GPT-4V

Sources: Official SAT (Spatial Aptitude Training) 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.

DateDocumentScoreAs the document writes itSection
Sep 25, 2025 gemini-robotics-er-1.5-preview technical report 76.7 SAT (Table 19, thinking on). Thinking off 62.0 Capabilities

More in Vision

All 281 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%