Organizations: Shanghai Artificial Intelligence Laboratory · Shanghai Jiao Tong University · Shanghai University of Electric Power · East China Normal University
The rapid progress of Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) marks a significant step toward artificial general intelligence, offering great potential for augmenting human capabilities. However, their ability to provide effective assistance in dynamic, real-world environments remains largely underexplored. Existing video benchmarks predominantly assess passive understanding through retrospective analysis or isolated perception tasks, failing to capture the interactive and adaptive nature of real-time user assistance. To bridge this gap, we introduce LifeEval, a multimodal benchmark designed to evaluate real-time, task-oriented human-AI collaboration in daily life from an egocentric perspective. LifeEval emphasizes three key aspects: task-oriented holistic evaluation, egocentric real-time perception from continuous first-person streams, and human-assistant collaborative interaction through natural dialogues. Constructed via a rigorous annotation pipeline, the benchmark comprises 4,075 high-quality question-answer pairs across 6 core capability dimensions. Extensive evaluations of 26 state-of-the-art MLLMs on LifeEval reveal substantial challenges in achieving timely, effective and adaptive interaction, highlighting essential directions for advancing human-centered interactive intelligence.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Overview of LifeEval. The benchmark emphasizes real-life interactive scenarios, requiring models to deliver precise, context-aware, and adaptive assistance.
Benchmark
#QAs
#Clips
Egocentric
Interactive
Real-Time
Task-Assist.
Multi-Turn
Rationale
Question Type
Annotation
MVBench [ 19 ]
4000
3641
✗
✗
✗
✗
✗
✗
Close
Auto
VideoMME [ 12 ]
2700
900
✗
✗
✗
✗
✗
✗
Close
Manual
Video-TT [ 49 ]
5000
1000
✗
✗
✗
✗
✗
✓
Open&Close
Auto&Manual
OmniMMI [ 34 ]
2290
1121
❍
✓
✓
✗
❍
✗
Open
Manual
OvO-Bench [ 25 ]
2814
644
❍
✗
❍
✗
✗
✗
Close
Auto&Manual
EgoVQA [ 10 ]
520
520
✓
✗
✗
✗
✗
✗
Close
Manual
Table 1: Comparison of LifeEval with existing video benchmarks. Columns summarize key properties, including dataset size (#QAs, #Clips), egocentric perspective, interactive and real-time settings, task-oriented assistance, multi-turn dialogue, availability of reasoning rationales for each answer, and annotation method. Symbols: ✓ (Yes), ❍ (Partial), ✗ (No).
Figure 2: Capability dimensions and examples in LifeEval. LifeEval defines six core capability dimensions to comprehensively evaluate a model’s interactive assistance abilities in daily life. The benchmark features both multiple-choice and open-ended questions, each accompanied by detailed reasoning explanations.
Figure 3: Task goal distribution and QA vocabulary statistics in LifeEval.
Statistics
Number
Percentage
Capacities
- Static Environment Perception (SEP)
666
16.34%
- Dynamic Task Reasoning (DTR)
708
17.37%
- Contextual Knowledge Retrieval (CKR)
775
19.02%
- Goal-oriented Planning (GP)
744
18.26%
- Safety and Feasibility Assessment (SFA)
646
15.85%
Table 2: Question statistics of LifeEval.
Model
Multiple-Choice Questions
Open-Ended Questions
SEP
DTR
CKR
GP
SFA
MIC
Overall
SEP
DTR
CKR
GP
SFA
MIC
Overall
Proprietary MLLMs
GPT-5 [ 26 ]
7 9.10
79.73
8 8.21
7 6.66
8 4.45
8 7.92
8 2.48
63.67
66.05
80.65
69.89
79.80
73.92
72.39
GPT-4o [ 15 ]
68.06
70.00
81.54
67.11
77.74
82.87
74.23
46.15
48.08
61.23
52.72
64.23
59.29
55.19
GPT-5-mini [ 26 ]
77.31
75.68
84.36
75.07
82.01
86.25
79.85
6 4.95
58.21
73.18
63.69
75.79
69.12
67.44
Gemini-2.5-Flash [ 7 ]
71.04
70.00
85.38
72.41
82.62
81.32
76.98
56.12
57.91
71.30
59.54
72.56
67.23
64.05
Table 3: Main evaluation results of representative MLLMs on LifeEval across different capability dimensions and question types. Bold and u nderline denote the best and second-best results, respectively.
Figure 7
# Frames
MCQ
OEQ
1f
8f
32f
1f
8f
32f
GPT-5
80.03
82.48
82.51
67.94
72.39
70.32
(+2.45)
(+2.48)
(+4.45)
(+2.38)
InternVL3.5-8B
56.72
57.98
57.26
24.38
25.40
26.31
(+1.26)
(+0.54)
(+1.02)
(+1.93)
LLaVA-OV-7B
56.65
56.17
55.39
29.11
29.81
29.22
Table 4: Performance comparison with varying input frame. Numbers in the second row of each model denote performance gain relative to 1-frame.
The rapid advancement of large language models (LLMs) has accelerated progress toward universal AI assistants. However, existing benchmarks for personalized assistants remain misaligned with real-world user-assistant interactions, failing to capture the complexity of external contexts and users' cognitive states. To bridge this gap, we propose LifeSim, a user simulator that models user cognition through the Belief-Desire-Intention (BDI) model within physical environments for coherent life trajectories generation, and simulates intention-driven user interactive behaviors. Based on LifeSim, we introduce LifeSim-Eval, a comprehensive benchmark for multi-scenario, long-horizon personalized assistance. LifeSim-Eval covers 8 life domains and 1,200 diverse scenarios, and adopts a multi-turn interactive method to assess models' abilities to complete explicit and implicit intentions, recover user profiles, and produce high-quality responses. Under both single-scenario and long-horizon settings, our experiments reveal that current LLMs face significant limitations in handling implicit intention and long-term user preference modeling.
Feiyu Duan, Xuanjing Huang, Zhongyu Wei
School of Data Science, Fudan University · College of Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence, Fudan University · Shanghai Innovation Institute +2
Large language model (LLM) agents are increasingly deployed as personal assistants. Existing evaluations, however, mostly use short, self-contained requests in static environments. Everyday life assistance is different. A task runs for weeks rather than minutes. The world keeps changing while the agent is not being prompted. Many constraints are never stated outright. An agent that merely answers the request in front of it will fail at such a task. What is needed instead is an agent that stays proactive and consistent. It decides on its own when to act, when to ask, and when to stay silent. It notices changes that nobody announced. It keeps one plan coherent from the first day to the last. No current benchmark measures this. We introduce VibeLifeBench, a benchmark of 200 long-horizon tasks across ten everyday-life domains. Each task is a scripted multi-week timeline in a simulated world of 22 mock services. The world advances on its own clock, and many of its changes are silent, so only an agent that re-inspects the world discovers them. Every task is graded by fine-grained, weighted checks that read only what the agent actually left behind, covering the end state, the timeliness of its actions, and whether it upheld the implicit constraints. We evaluate seven frontier models. All of them score low, which shows how far current agents are from assisting with real life. We will open-source all tasks, environments, and the evaluation framework.
As AI agents increasingly operate in open, real-world environments, they require a deep synergy of multimodal perception, tool invocation with multi-hop reasoning, and dynamic interaction with users. However, existing benchmarks fail to jointly evaluate these capabilities due to challenges in designing strictly coupled multi-capability tasks, simulating natural and task-constrained user feedback, and ensuring objective evaluation of dynamic interaction. To bridge this gap, we introduce EgoBench, the first interactive multimodal benchmark for tool-using agents. EgoBench comprises 1,590 egocentric-video-grounded tasks covering five daily scenarios, along with a user-agent-tool interactive environment for evaluation. We implement a three-stage synergistic pipeline through which each task is designed to enforce the joint application of visual perception and tool-augmented multi-hop reasoning. We additionally develop a multi-agent simulated user to evaluate agents' interaction capabilities, which generates high-fidelity, task-aligned responses to agents. Furthermore, we establish a deterministic joint validation framework that guarantees objective assessment through process-based and result-based equivalence. Benchmarking eight video-MLLM agents on EgoBench reveals a severe performance ceiling: the best-performing model achieves only a 34.95% average Joint Success Rate across the three interaction modes. Finally, we conduct a multi-dimensional error analysis to disentangle failure modes, exposing capability bottlenecks for advancing future AI agents.