Benchmark Almanac

VGI-Bench

Not in model cards

Video generation models solve 27 visual reasoning tasks with 810 instances through generated frames. Scoring checks that the process is valid, not only the final frame.

77 upvotes on Hugging Face papers.

Released
August 2026
Kind
Video world models
Level
Everyday
Scored
Graded by a model
Answers
Open-ended
Tasks
All public
Scores refreshed
November 12th, 2026

In the authors’ words

Recent studies suggest that video generation models can exhibit certain forms of zero-shot visual reasoning through generated frames. Yet reliable evaluation remains challenging: benchmarks should adopt inputs aligned with the visual priors of current video models, require valid evolving processes rather than only plausible final states, and calibrate task difficulty to remain challenging yet partly feasible. To this end, we introduce VGI-bench, containing 27 tasks and 810 instances, organized by a two-level taxonomy of task domains and skill tags for fine-grained evaluation of visual reasoning capabilities of video generation models. Our evaluations show that current generative systems can solve a subset of visually grounded reasoning tasks, but remain far from reliable, with even the strongest model, Seedance 2.0, achieving only 51.0% under our evaluation criteria. Our analysis further explore the output failure modes, input condition sensitivity, performance transfer boundary from synthetic fine-tuning, and internal denoising perspective revealing limited self-correction, where later steps mainly refine early hypotheses rather than correct reasoning errors. We hope VGI-bench will help stimulate the development of next-generation video generation models. Website: https://hexuan21.github.io/VGI-Bench/

Abstract of VGI-Bench: Probing Visual Intelligence in Video Generation Models (arXiv:2608.19583, CC0)
10
Entries on its own leaderboard, 6 models we track

Dreamina Seedance 2.0 leads with 51%

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.

  1. 1 Dreamina Seedance 2.0 51%
  2. 2 MiniMax H3 44.4%
  3. 3 Kling v3 Pro 44%
  4. 4 VBVR-Wan 2.2 40.2%
  5. 5 Sora 2 36.7%
  6. 6 Runway Gen-4.5 36.6%
  7. 7 Wan 2.7 35.7%
  8. 8 Veo 3.1 32%
  9. 9 Wan 2.2 21.6%
  10. 10 HunyuanVideo 1.5 19.1%

Source: Official VGI-Bench leaderboard

#EntryScoreSettingDateSource
1 Dreamina Seedance 2.0 51% Official leaderboard
2 MiniMax H3 44.4% Official leaderboard
3 Kling v3 Pro 44% Official leaderboard
4 VBVR-Wan 2.2 40.2% Official leaderboard
5 Sora 2 36.7% Official leaderboard
6 Runway Gen-4.5 36.6% Official leaderboard
7 Wan 2.7 35.7% Official leaderboard
8 Veo 3.1 32% Official leaderboard
9 Wan 2.2 21.6% Official leaderboard
10 HunyuanVideo 1.5 19.1% Official leaderboard

Scores over time

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

No dated values yet.

No lab model card reports it yet

We read the headline results of 522 launch posts from 52 labs, and none of them list this benchmark.

More in World models

All 39 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%
  • RBench Only in system cards 650 image+text prompts for robot video generation (tasks and embodiments). MLLM judge scores task completion, physical plausibility, stability. Wan 2.6 60.7%