Benchmark Almanac

SURDS

In use

Models answer spatial questions about objects in nuScenes driving camera images across six single-object and multi-object tasks. Scoring is task accuracy.

The first arXiv version was called DriveMLLM before the authors renamed it SURDS.

Released
November 2024
Kind
Spatial reasoning and counting
Level
Everyday
Scored
Checked automatically
Answers
Short answer
Tasks
All public
Strongest model tested
Qwen 3.8 Max #29 on the capability index
Last in a launch post
August 2026
Last model added
August 2026

In the authors’ words

Accurate spatial reasoning in outdoor environments - covering geometry, object pose, and inter-object relationships - is fundamental to downstream tasks such as mapping, motion forecasting, and high-level planning in autonomous driving. We introduce SURDS, a large-scale benchmark designed to systematically evaluate the spatial reasoning capabilities of vision language models (VLMs). Built on the nuScenes dataset, SURDS comprises 41,080 vision-question-answer training instances and 9,250 evaluation samples, spanning six spatial categories: orientation, depth estimation, pixel-level localization, pairwise distance, lateral ordering, and front-behind relations. We benchmark leading general-purpose VLMs, including GPT, Gemini, and Qwen, revealing persistent limitations in fine-grained spatial understanding. To address these deficiencies, we go beyond static evaluation and explore whether alignment techniques can improve spatial reasoning performance. Specifically, we propose a reinforcement learning-based alignment scheme leveraging spatially grounded reward signals - capturing both perception-level accuracy (location) and reasoning consistency (logic). We further incorporate final-answer correctness and output-format rewards to guide fine-grained policy adaptation. Our GRPO-aligned variant achieves an overall score of 40.80 in the SURDS benchmark. Notably, it outperforms proprietary systems such as GPT-4o (13.30) and Gemini-2.0-flash (35.71). To our best knowledge, this is the first study to demonstrate that reinforcement learning-based alignment can significantly and consistently enhance the spatial reasoning capabilities of VLMs in real-world driving contexts. We release the SURDS benchmark, evaluation toolkit, and GRPO alignment code through: https://github.com/XiandaGuo/Drive-MLLM.

Abstract of SURDS: Benchmarking Spatial Understanding and Reasoning in Driving Scenarios with Vision Language Models (arXiv:2411.13112, CC0)
2
Models scored in lab cards
2
Launch posts list it, from 1 lab

Qwen 3.8 Max leads with 77.8%

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.

  1. 1 Qwen 3.8 Max 77.8%
  2. 2 Qwen3.7-Plus 77.2%

Source: Labs’ model cards

#ModelScoreSettingDateSource
1 Qwen 3.8 Max 77.8% Aug 2026 Lab model card
2 Qwen3.7-Plus 77.2% Jun 2026 Lab model card

Scores over time

All the scores we have, one dot each, so a model tested at several settings appears more than once.

Reported by the lab in its model card Best so far
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2026 Near the ceiling (85%) Qwen 3.8 Max Qwen3.7-Plus 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2026 Near the ceiling (85%) Qwen 3.8 Max

Source: Labs’ model cards

One lab put it in a launch post in the last six months

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.

Qwen
DateLaunch postScoreAs the post writes it
Aug 3, 2026 Qwen 3.8 Max 77.8 SURDS
Jun 1, 2026 Qwen3.7-Plus 77.2 SURDS

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%