RoboVista: Evaluating Vision Language Models for Diverse Robot Applications

Vision-language models (VLMs) are increasingly explored as visual critics, reward generators, and failure detectors in robotic manipulation. These roles implicitly require models to judge not only final task success, but also how a manipulation execution is physically and temporally progressing. However, existing evaluations fail to test whether VLMs possess fine-grained process understanding. To address this gap, we present RoboProcessBench, a benchmark for process-aware understanding in vision-language robotic manipulation. RoboProcessBench decomposes such capability into two complementary dimensions, \emph{static monitoring} and \emph{dynamic reasoning}, instantiated as 12 diagnostic question families covering phase, contact, motion, coordination, primitive-local progress, temporal order, outcome, and primitive-level transitions. Built from physically grounded execution traces, the curated benchmark corpus ProcessData contains \textasciitilde 58k question-answer pairs across 260 manipulation tasks, which is further split into ProcessData-SFT and ProcessData-Eval for post-training and evaluation purposes. Extensive evaluation of various VLMs on ProcessData-Eval reveals broad limitations across 12 diagnostic task families, suggesting current models still lack robust process-aware understanding of manipulation executions. But with ProcessData-SFT, the post-trained \textit{Qwen2.5-VL-7B} and \textit{InternVL-3-8B} exhibit consistent gains on local state, motion, progress, and primitive-aware cues. These results demonstrate that RoboProcessBench serves as both an evaluation benchmark and a learnable supervision source for developing VLMs capable of monitoring and evaluating robotic manipulation processes. Project webpage: \href{https://processbench-2026.github.io/RoboProcessBench-Web/}{https://processbench-2026.github.io}.

Recent advances in robot world models enable synthetic video generation for embodied prediction and planning. However, evaluating these videos is challenging: visually realistic outputs often violate physical laws, temporal consistency, or task logic, while conventional metrics and monolithic Vision-Language Model (VLM) judges fail to generalize or provide precise diagnostic value. We present RoboGaze, a training-free, multi-agent VLM framework that provides structured, interpretable evaluation for generated robot-manipulation videos. Given a task instruction and video, RoboGaze operates via a three-stage pipeline: task-scene grounding, dimension-specific specialist routing, and critic-based verification. It outputs temporally localized glitch reports categorized under a novel 6-dimension, 30-type robotics-specific taxonomy. To benchmark RoboGaze, we introduce a human-validated dataset of 382 clips spanning simulated and real-world multi-view manipulation. Evaluating eight open-source and proprietary VLM backbones, RoboGaze dramatically outperforms zero-shot baselines, improving description-F1 by up to +43 points and temporal alignment (F1 x IoU) by up to +37 points, closing approximately 85% of the gap to the human ceiling. Furthermore, its critic verifier mitigates the "cry-wolf" false-positive flaw of standard VLMs, lifting clean-clip accuracy from under 25% to over 80%. RoboGaze offers a scalable, highly interpretable diagnostic tool for the rigorous evaluation of robot world models.

Testing robots requires assessing whether they perform their intended tasks correctly, dependably, and with high quality, a challenge known as the test oracle problem in software testing. Traditionally, this assessment relies on task-specific symbolic oracles for task correctness and on human manual evaluation of robot behavior, which is time-consuming, subjective, and error-prone. To address this, we propose VISOR, a Vision-Language Model (VLM)-based approach for automated test oracle assessment that eliminates the need of expensive human evaluations. VISOR performs automated evaluation of task correctness and quality, addressing the limitations of existing symbolic test oracles, which are task-specific and provide pass/fail judgments without explicitly quantifying task quality. Given the inherent uncertainty in VLMs, VISOR also explicitly quantifies its own uncertainty during test assessments. We evaluated VISOR using two VLMs, i.e., GPT and Gemini, across four robotic tasks on over 1,000 videos. Results show that Gemini achieves higher recall while GPT achieves higher precision. However, both models show low correlation between uncertainty and correctness, which prevents using uncertainty as a correctness predictor.