Benchmark Almanac

VSI-Bench-Debiased

Cambrian-S 58.3% tops its leaderboard InternVL3-9B 41.5% leads the models we track
Not in model cards

Models answer the 2,362 VSI-Bench questions left after removing 2,768 that text-only models could solve from answer priors or world knowledge.

The makers call it a separate evaluation artifact, not a drop-in replacement for VSI-Bench, because the filter changes the question-type mix. It is the debiased config of the VSI-Bench dataset.

Released
November 2025
Kind
Spatial reasoning and counting
Level
Everyday
Scored
Checked automatically
Answers
Multiple choice
Tasks
All public
Last model added
April 2025
Scores refreshed
November 12th, 2026

In the authors’ words

Multimodal LLMs can answer many questions in vision-centric benchmarks without looking at the image, using linguistic priors and skewed answer distributions. Blind evaluation shows what a model already answers this way, but not what it could learn from the test set's own regularities. Extending partial-input auditing (e.g., hypothesis-only baselines in natural language inference), we argue that benchmark designers should "train on the test set": probe the artifact they release for exploitable patterns. Our Test-set Stress-Test (TsT) cross-validates a text-only Qwen2-7B on the test set's questions and answer options, yielding a benchmark-level score and a per-question bias score s(x); a random forest on hand-crafted features adds a fast, interpretable audit. On the template-based VSI-Bench and CV-Bench, the held-out score is 17.9 and 13.1 points above the model's own zero-shot score. On MMMU it learns little, even though GPT-4o correctly answers 52.3% of its multiple-choice questions without the image, so blind success there reflects pretrained knowledge rather than learnable test-set patterns. Iterative Bias Pruning (IBP) removes the questions with the highest s(x) and re-diagnoses; on VSI-Bench it widens a fine-tuned model's vision-blind gap more than random removal at the same rate. We also release VSI-Bench-Debiased, which lowers a fine-tuned model's blind score from 44.7 to 32.0 while its vision score falls only from 57.1 to 48.7.

Abstract of Benchmark Designers Should "Train on the Test Set" to Expose Exploitable Non-Visual Shortcuts (arXiv:2511.04655, CC0)
7
Entries on its own leaderboard, 4 models we track

Cambrian-S tops the leaderboard with 58.3%

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 InternVL3-9B, at 41.5%.

The newest model with a score here came out in April 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 Cambrian-S 58.3%
  2. 2 LLaVA-Video-7B + FT 48.7%
  3. 3 InternVL3-9B 41.5%
  4. 4 InternVL2.5-26B 38.4%
  5. 5 InternVL2.5-8B 37.5%
  6. 6 LLaVA-Video-7B 31.9%
  7. 7 LLaVA-OneVision 7B 29.6%

Source: Official VSI-Bench-Debiased leaderboard

#EntryScoreSettingDateSource
1 Cambrian-S 58.3% Official leaderboard
2 LLaVA-Video-7B + FT 48.7% Official leaderboard
3 InternVL3-9B 41.5% Apr 2025 Official leaderboard
4 InternVL2.5-26B 38.4% Dec 2024 Official leaderboard
5 InternVL2.5-8B 37.5% Dec 2024 Official leaderboard
6 LLaVA-Video-7B 31.9% Official leaderboard
7 LLaVA-OneVision 7B 29.6% Aug 2024 Official leaderboard

Number one over time

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

Shanghai AI Lab
Own leaderboard Not tested since Nov 2025
InternVL3-9B 41.5%

Source: Official VSI-Bench-Debiased 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%) InternVL3-9B InternVL2.5-26B LLaVA-OneVision 7B 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2025 Near the ceiling (85%) InternVL3-9B LLaVA-OneVision 7B

Source: Official VSI-Bench-Debiased 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 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%