VSI-Bench-Debiased
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.
- Made by
- New York University (VisionX)
- 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.
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:
- Claude Fable 5.2
-
Gemini 4 Carbon
- GPT-6 Astra
- Claude Opus 5.5
- and 16 more
- 1 Cambrian-S 58.3%
- 2 LLaVA-Video-7B + FT 48.7%
- 3
InternVL3-9B 41.5%
- 4
InternVL2.5-26B 38.4%
- 5
InternVL2.5-8B 37.5%
- 6 LLaVA-Video-7B 31.9%
- 7
LLaVA-OneVision 7B 29.6%
Source: Official VSI-Bench-Debiased leaderboard
| # | Entry | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Cambrian-S | 58.3% | Official leaderboard | ||
| 2 | LLaVA-Video-7B + FT | 48.7% | Official leaderboard | ||
| 3 | | 41.5% | Apr 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 4 | | 38.4% | Dec 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 5 | | 37.5% | Dec 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 6 | LLaVA-Video-7B | 31.9% | Official leaderboard | ||
| 7 | | 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.
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.
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
- 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%