Benchmark Almanac

Video-Oasis

Gemini-2.5 Pro (snapshot unspecified) 46.7% tops its leaderboard Eagle2.5-8B 34.5% leads the models we track
Not in model cards

A diagnostic suite that audits video understanding benchmarks and keeps only samples that need visual and temporal input. Models are tested on the remaining video-native questions.

The audit found 55% of existing benchmark samples solvable without the video or its timing. 65 HF paper upvotes.

Made by
NAVER and collaborators
Released
March 2026
Kind
Video understanding
Level
Everyday
Scored
Checked automatically
Answers
Multiple choice
Tasks
All public
Last model added
August 2025
Scores refreshed
November 12th, 2026

In the authors’ words

The inherent complexity of video understanding makes it difficult to determine whether Video-LLM benchmark performance stems from visual perception, linguistic reasoning, or knowledge priors. While many benchmarks have emerged to assess high-level reasoning, shared criteria for evaluating video understanding remain largely overlooked. Instead of introducing yet another benchmark, we take a step back to re-examine the criteria for evaluating video understanding. In this work, we introduce Video-Oasis, a sustainable diagnostic suite for systematically auditing existing video understanding benchmarks. This audit reveals that 55% of existing benchmark samples are solvable without visual input or temporal context. After filtering these shortcuts, the remaining video-native challenges expose a substantial capability gap: state-of-the-art models perform only marginally above random guessing. Building on these findings, we use the distilled challenges as a testbed to investigate which algorithmic design choices contribute to robust video understanding. We hope our work provides a practical foundation for constructing rigorous video benchmarks and evaluating future Video-LLMs. Code is available at https://github.com/sejong-rcv/Video-Oasis.

Abstract of Video-Oasis: Rethinking Evaluation of Video Understanding (arXiv:2603.29616, CC0)
13
Entries on its own leaderboard, 4 models we track

Gemini-2.5 Pro (snapshot unspecified) tops the leaderboard with 46.7%

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. The best model we track is Eagle2.5-8B, at 34.5%.

The newest model with a score here came out in August 2025, and nobody has tested a newer one. Among the 20 highest-ranked models on the capability index, these have no score yet:

  1. 1 Gemini-2.5 Pro (snapshot unspecified) 46.7%
  2. 2 STAR (GPT-5 mini) 39.5%
  3. 3 VideoAuto-R1 (8B) 36.8%
  4. 4 Qwen3-VL Think. (8B) 34.6%
  5. 5 Eagle2.5-8B 34.5%
  6. 6 Qwen3-VL Inst. (8B) 33.8%
  7. 7 InternVL3.5-8B 33.6%
  8. 8 InternVL3-8B 31.6%
  9. 9 VideoTree (GPT-5 mini) 30.1%
  10. 10 Qwen2.5-VL-7B 29.2%
  11. 11 LongViLA-R1 (7B) 28.6%
  12. 12 GPT-4o (snapshot unspecified) 27.5%
  13. 13 Video-R1 (7B) 26.3%

Source: Official Video-Oasis leaderboard

#EntryScoreSettingDateSource
1 Gemini-2.5 Pro (snapshot unspecified) 46.7% Official leaderboard
2 STAR (GPT-5 mini) 39.5% Official leaderboard
3 VideoAuto-R1 (8B) 36.8% Official leaderboard
4 Qwen3-VL Think. (8B) 34.6% Official leaderboard
5 Eagle2.5-8B 34.5% Apr 2025 Official leaderboard
6 Qwen3-VL Inst. (8B) 33.8% Official leaderboard
7 InternVL3.5-8B 33.6% Aug 2025 Official leaderboard
8 InternVL3-8B 31.6% Apr 2025 Official leaderboard
9 VideoTree (GPT-5 mini) 30.1% Official leaderboard
10 Qwen2.5-VL-7B 29.2% Jan 2025 Official leaderboard
11 LongViLA-R1 (7B) 28.6% Official leaderboard
12 GPT-4o (snapshot unspecified) 27.5% Official leaderboard
13 Video-R1 (7B) 26.3% Official leaderboard

Number one over time

Lab claims count from the day the card came out, independent runs from the model’s release.

NVIDIA
Own leaderboard Not tested since Mar 2026
Eagle2.5-8B 34.5%

Source: Official Video-Oasis leaderboard

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 Best so far
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2025 Near the ceiling (85%) Eagle2.5-8B Qwen2.5-VL-7B 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2025 Near the ceiling (85%) Eagle2.5-8B

Source: Official Video-Oasis leaderboard

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 Audio and video

All 233 in Audio and video
  • Video-MMMU In use 300 expert-level lecture videos with questions testing perception, comprehension and adaptation of knowledge. Accuracy. Qwen 3.8 Max 88.7%
  • LVBench In use Hours-long video understanding with multiple-choice questions on reasoning, grounding and summarization. Gemini 4 Argon 91.7%
  • MMVU In use 3,000 expert-annotated questions on videos across 27 disciplines. Multiple-choice and open-ended accuracy. Qwen 3.8 Max 82.4%
  • MLVU In use Multi-task long video understanding (minutes to hours) with multiple-choice and generation tasks. Accuracy. Qwen 3.8 Max 90.8%
  • FLEURS In use Models transcribe read speech in 102 languages built from FLoRes-101 sentences. Model cards usually report word error rate, so lower scores are better. Phi-4-multimodal 4.00%
  • VoiceBench In use Spoken instructions with speaker, environment and content variation. Voice assistant responses scored by GPT judge or rules. Qwen3.5-Omni-Plus 93.1%