SGP-Bench
Models read symbolic graphics programs such as SVG and CAD code and answer questions about what the rendered image would show, without seeing the image.
The benchmark is built procedurally.
- Released
- August 2024
- Kind
- General visual questions
- Level
- University
- Scored
- Checked automatically
- Answers
- Multiple choice
- Tasks
- All public
- Strongest model tested
- Claude 3.5 Sonnet #157 on the capability index
- Last in a launch post
- August 2025, dropped before it saturated
- Last model added
- August 2025
- Scores refreshed
- November 12th, 2026
In the authors’ words
Against the backdrop of enthusiasm for large language models (LLMs), there is a growing need to scientifically assess their capabilities and shortcomings. This is nontrivial in part because it is difficult to find tasks which the models have not encountered during training. Utilizing symbolic graphics programs, we propose a domain well-suited to test multiple spatial-semantic reasoning skills of LLMs. Popular in computer graphics, these programs procedurally generate visual data. While LLMs exhibit impressive skills in general program synthesis and analysis, symbolic graphics programs offer a new layer of evaluation: they allow us to test an LLM's ability to answer semantic questions about the images or 3D geometries without a vision encoder. To semantically understand the symbolic programs, LLMs would need to possess the ability to "imagine" and reason how the corresponding graphics content would look with only the symbolic description of the local curvatures and strokes. We use this task to evaluate LLMs by creating a large benchmark for the semantic visual understanding of symbolic graphics programs, built procedurally with minimal human effort. Particular emphasis is placed on transformations of images that leave the image level semantics invariant while introducing significant changes to the underlying program. We evaluate commercial and open-source LLMs on our benchmark to assess their ability to reason about visual output of programs, finding that LLMs considered stronger at reasoning generally perform better. Lastly, we introduce a novel method to improve this ability – Symbolic Instruction Tuning (SIT), in which the LLM is finetuned with pre-collected instruction data on symbolic graphics programs. Interestingly, we find that SIT not only improves LLM's understanding on symbolic programs, but it also improves general reasoning ability on various other benchmarks.
Claude 3.5 Sonnet leads with 67.4% among models released by August 2024
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.
InternVL3.5-241B-A28B leads with 70.7%, 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.
The newest model with a score here came out in August 2024, 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
- 67.4 Claude 3.5 Sonnet
- 64.8 GPT-4o
- 63.3 GPT-4o
- 60.9 GPT-4 Turbo
- 58.5 GPT-4o mini
- 58.0
Llama 3.1-405B
- 57.4
Llama 3.1-70B
- 57.2 Mistral-Large2-12B
- 56.5 Claude 3 Sonnet
- 54.8
Llama 3-70B
- 53.7
Qwen2-72B
- 50.0 Command R-104B
- 49.9
Qwen1.5-110B
- 49.8 GPT-3.5 Turbo-01-25
- 49.4
Qwen1.5-32B
- 49.1 Mistral-Codestral-22b-v0.1
- 48.6 Claude 3 Haiku
- 47.4 Reflection-Llama3.1-70B
- 46.6
Qwen1.5-72B
- 46.5
Llama 3.1-8B
- 46.1 Command R-35B
- 45.1 DeepSeek-Coder-V2-16B
- 44.9 Mistral-NeMo-12B
- 44.3
Yi-1.5-34B
- 44.2 Aya-23-35B
- 42.9
Llama 3-8B
- 42.4 InternLM2-20B
- 42.1 InternLM2.5-7B
- 41.7
Mistral 7B v0.3
- 39.3
Gemma 1.1 7B IT
- 38.2 InternLM2-7B
- 37.6
Qwen1.5-7B
- 35.5 Yi-1.5-9B
- 31.7
Gemma 1.1 2B IT
- 30.1 CodeQwen1.5-7B
- 29.0 Aya-23-8B
- 1 Claude 3.5 Sonnet 67.4%
- 2 GPT-4o Aug 2024 64.8%
- 3 GPT-4o May 2024 63.3%
- 4 GPT-4 Turbo Apr 2024 60.9%
- 5 GPT-4o mini 58.5%
- 6
Llama 3.1-405B 58%
- 7
Llama 3.1-70B 57.4%
- 8 Mistral-Large2-12B 57.2%
- 9 Claude 3 Sonnet 56.5%
- 10
Llama 3-70B 54.8%
- 11
Qwen2-72B 53.7%
- 12 Command R-104B 50%
- 13
Qwen1.5-110B 49.9%
- 14 GPT-3.5 Turbo-01-25 49.8%
- 15
Qwen1.5-32B 49.4%
- 16 Mistral-Codestral-22b-v0.1 49.1%
- 17 Claude 3 Haiku 48.6%
- 18 Reflection-Llama3.1-70B 47.4%
- 19
Qwen1.5-72B 46.6%
- 20
Llama 3.1-8B 46.5%
- 21 Command R-35B 46.1%
- 22 DeepSeek-Coder-V2-16B 45.1%
- 23 Mistral-NeMo-12B 44.9%
- 24
Yi-1.5-34B 44.3%
- 25 Aya-23-35B 44.2%
- 26
Llama 3-8B 42.9%
- 27 InternLM2-20B 42.4%
- 28 InternLM2.5-7B 42.1%
- 29
Mistral 7B v0.3 41.7%
- 30
Gemma 1.1 7B IT 39.3%
- 31 InternLM2-7B 38.2%
- 32
Qwen1.5-7B 37.6%
- 33 Yi-1.5-9B 35.5%
- 34
Gemma 1.1 2B IT 31.7%
- 35 CodeQwen1.5-7B 30.1%
- 36 Aya-23-8B 29%
Source: Official SGP-Bench leaderboard
- 70.7
InternVL3.5-241B-A28B
- 67.4 Claude 3.5 Sonnet
- 64.8 GPT-4o
- 63.3 GPT-4o
- 60.9 GPT-4 Turbo
- 58.5 GPT-4o mini
- 58.0
Llama 3.1-405B
- 57.4
Llama 3.1-70B
- 56.5 Claude 3 Sonnet
- 54.8
Llama 3-70B
- 53.7
Qwen2-72B
- 49.9
Qwen1.5-110B
- 49.4
Qwen1.5-32B
- 48.6 Claude 3 Haiku
- 46.6
Qwen1.5-72B
- 46.5
Llama 3.1-8B
- 44.3
Yi-1.5-34B
- 42.9
Llama 3-8B
- 41.7
Mistral 7B v0.3
- 39.3
Gemma 1.1 7B IT
- 37.6
Qwen1.5-7B
- 31.7
Gemma 1.1 2B IT
- 30.1 CodeQwen1.5-7B
- 1
InternVL3.5-241B-A28B 70.7%
- 2 Claude 3.5 Sonnet 67.4%
- 3 GPT-4o Aug 2024 64.8%
- 4 GPT-4o May 2024 63.3%
- 5 GPT-4 Turbo Apr 2024 60.9%
- 6 GPT-4o mini 58.5%
- 7
Llama 3.1-405B 58%
- 8
Llama 3.1-70B 57.4%
- 9 Claude 3 Sonnet 56.5%
- 10
Llama 3-70B 54.8%
- 11
Qwen2-72B 53.7%
- 12
Qwen1.5-110B 49.9%
- 13
Qwen1.5-32B 49.4%
- 14 Claude 3 Haiku 48.6%
- 15
Qwen1.5-72B 46.6%
- 16
Llama 3.1-8B 46.5%
- 17
Yi-1.5-34B 44.3%
- 18
Llama 3-8B 42.9%
- 19
Mistral 7B v0.3 41.7%
- 20
Gemma 1.1 7B IT 39.3%
- 21
Qwen1.5-7B 37.6%
- 22
Gemma 1.1 2B IT 31.7%
- 23 CodeQwen1.5-7B 30.1%
Sources: Labs’ model cards and official SGP-Bench leaderboard
| # | Entry | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | 67.4% | Jun 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 2 | GPT-4o Aug 2024 | 64.8% | Aug 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 3 | GPT-4o May 2024 | 63.3% | May 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 4 | GPT-4 Turbo Apr 2024 | 60.9% | Apr 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 5 | GPT-4o mini | 58.5% | Jul 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 6 | | 58% | Jul 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 7 | | 57.4% | Jul 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 8 | Mistral-Large2-12B | 57.2% | Jul 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 9 | Claude 3 Sonnet | 56.5% | Feb 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 10 | | 54.8% | Apr 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 11 | | 53.7% | Jun 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 12 | Command R-104B | 50% | Jul 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 13 | | 49.9% | Apr 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 14 | GPT-3.5 Turbo-01-25 | 49.8% | Jan 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 15 | | 49.4% | Feb 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 16 | Mistral-Codestral-22b-v0.1 | 49.1% | Jun 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 17 | Claude 3 Haiku | 48.6% | Mar 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 18 | Reflection-Llama3.1-70B | 47.4% | Sep 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 19 | | 46.6% | Feb 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 20 | | 46.5% | Jul 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 21 | Command R-35B | 46.1% | Jun 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 22 | DeepSeek-Coder-V2-16B | 45.1% | Jul 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 23 | Mistral-NeMo-12B | 44.9% | Jul 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 24 | | 44.3% | May 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 25 | Aya-23-35B | 44.2% | Jul 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 26 | | 42.9% | Apr 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 27 | InternLM2-20B | 42.4% | Jul 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 28 | InternLM2.5-7B | 42.1% | Jul 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 29 | | 41.7% | Sep 2023 | Official leaderboard | |
| 30 | | 39.3% | Apr 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 31 | InternLM2-7B | 38.2% | Jul 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 32 | | 37.6% | Feb 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 33 | Yi-1.5-9B | 35.5% | Jun 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 34 | | 31.7% | Apr 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 35 | CodeQwen1.5-7B | 30.1% | Apr 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 36 | Aya-23-8B | 29% | Jul 2024 | Official leaderboard |
| # | Model | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | | 70.7% | Aug 2025 | Lab model card | |
| 2 | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | 67.4% | Jun 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 3 | GPT-4o Aug 2024 | 64.8% | Aug 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 4 | GPT-4o May 2024 | 63.3% | May 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 5 | GPT-4 Turbo Apr 2024 | 60.9% | Apr 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 6 | GPT-4o mini | 58.5% | Jul 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 7 | | 58% | Jul 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 8 | | 57.4% | Jul 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 9 | Claude 3 Sonnet | 56.5% | Feb 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 10 | | 54.8% | Apr 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 11 | | 53.7% | Jun 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 12 | | 49.9% | Apr 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 13 | | 49.4% | Feb 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 14 | Claude 3 Haiku | 48.6% | Mar 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 15 | | 46.6% | Feb 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 16 | | 46.5% | Jul 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 17 | | 44.3% | May 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 18 | | 42.9% | Apr 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 19 | | 41.7% | Sep 2023 | Official leaderboard | |
| 20 | | 39.3% | Apr 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 21 | | 37.6% | Feb 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 22 | | 31.7% | Apr 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 23 | CodeQwen1.5-7B | 30.1% | Apr 2024 | Official leaderboard |
Labs report scores for 1 model in their cards. Switch the scores above to rank them together.
Number one over time 2 models have held number one with claims included since its release in August 2024
Lab claims count from the day the card came out, independent runs from the model’s release.
Source: Official SGP-Bench leaderboard
Scores over time
All the scores we have, one dot each, so a model tested at several settings appears more than once.
Sources: Official SGP-Bench leaderboard and labs’ model cards
No launch post has listed it since August 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.
| Date | Launch post | Score | As the post writes it |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 25, 2025 | 70.7 | SGP-Bench |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 25, 2025 | | 70.7 | SGP-Bench Overall (Table 2, Table 12). Semantics 51.2, Count 69.2, Color 92.1, Shape 77.6, Reasoning 58.0 | 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%