VGI-Bench: Probing Visual Intelligence in Video Generation Models
Organizations: University of Illinois Urbana Champaign · University of Waterloo · Vector Institute · Tsinghua University · Massachusetts Institute of Technology · University of British Columbia · Etude AI · Independent · Microsoft Research
Abstract
Recent studies suggest that video generation models can exhibit certain forms of zero-shot visual reasoning through generated frames. Yet reliable evaluation remains challenging: benchmarks should adopt inputs aligned with the visual priors of current video models, require valid evolving processes rather than only plausible final states, and calibrate task difficulty to remain challenging yet partly feasible. To this end, we introduce VGI-bench, containing 27 tasks and 810 instances, organized by a two-level taxonomy of task domains and skill tags for fine-grained evaluation of visual reasoning capabilities of video generation models. Our evaluations show that current generative systems can solve a subset of visually grounded reasoning tasks, but remain far from reliable, with even the strongest model, Seedance 2.0, achieving only 51.0% under our evaluation criteria. Our analysis further explore the output failure modes, input condition sensitivity, performance transfer boundary from synthetic fine-tuning, and internal denoising perspective revealing limited self-correction, where later steps mainly refine early hypotheses rather than correct reasoning errors. We hope VGI-bench will help stimulate the development of next-generation video generation models. Website: https://hexuan21.github.io/VGI-Bench/
Figures & tables
| Category | Level | Commercial | Open Source | |||||||
| Sdce2.0 | Sora2 | Veo3.1 | Kling3.0 | Wan2.7 | Gen4.5 | Mnx-H3 | HY1.5 | Wan2.2 | ||
| Visual Org- anization | Easy | 72.6 | 55.6 | 50.3 | 67.6 | 37.0 | 60.5 | 42.8 | 26.6 | 30.4 |
| Mid | 56.4 | 37.0 | 43.3 | 47.5 | 32.2 | 38.3 | 42.3 | 17.9 | 15.3 | |
| Hard | 53.5 | 39.1 | 44.0 | 43.7 | 32.5 | 41.9 | 39.8 | 24.7 | 18.5 | |
| Avg. | 60.8 | 43.9 | 45.9 | 52.9 | 33.9 | 46.9 | 41.6 | 23.1 | 21.4 | |
| Spatiotemporal Dynamics | Easy | 54.6 | 45.3 | 28.1 | 45.2 | 38.9 | 39.6 | 44.3 | 34.7 | 38.7 |
| Judge Design | AUC | Pairwise Acc. |
| Main (w/ Gemini-3-Flash ) | 0.803 | 73.2% |
| w/o adaptive fps | 0.772 | 69.5% |
| w/o focus window | 0.753 | 68.3% |
| w/ GPT-5-mini | 0.690 | 64.3% |
| w/ Claude-Haiku-4.5 | 0.478 | 47.9% |
| w/ Qwen3.6-Plus | 0.624 | 59.1% |
| Commercial | Open Source | ||||||||||
| Nano- Banana-Pro | Qwen- Image-3-Pro | GPT- Image-2 | MAI-Image -2.5-Pro | Seedream 4.5 | Flux.2 Max Edit | Sense- Nova-U1 | JoyAI- Image | Qwen- Image-Edit | BAGEL | Step1X- Edit | |
| Easy | 62.5 | 51.9 | 48.8 | 44.9 | 27.5 | 23.8 | 22.2 | 11.2 | 11.2 | 1.2 | 1.2 |
| Mid | 50.0 | 43.8 | 38.8 | 35.1 | 21.2 | 20.3 | 14.4 | 10.0 | 5.0 | 1.2 | 0.0 |
| Hard | 52.5 | 32.5 | 36.2 | 30.3 | 22.5 | 17.7 | 12.2 | 10.0 | 6.2 | 0.0 | 1.2 |
| Avg. | 55.0 | 42.7 | 41.2 | 36.8 | 23.8 | 20.6 | 16.3 | 10.4 | 7.5 | 0.8 | 0.8 |
| Model | Overlap | Semi-overlap | Non-overlap |
| Wan2.2-I2V (base) | 15.3 | 17.8 | 29.2 |
| VBVR-Wan2.2 | 55.8 40.5 | 34.9 17.1 | 35.4 0 6.2 |
| Wan2.1-I2V (base) | 11.3 | 17.0 | 25.6 |
| VBVR-Wan2.1 | 25.1 13.8 | 20.2 0 3.2 | 22.0 0 3.6 |
| LTX-2.3 (base) | 15.0 | 18.2 | 15.5 |
| VBVR-LTX2.3 | 24.1 0 9.1 | 23.6 0 5.4 | 19.2 0 3.7 |
| Model | Structured Puzzles | Visual Organization | Spatiotemporal Dynamics | Physical Manipulation | Overall |
| Wan2.2-I2V | 11.6 | 21.4 | 30.2 | 24.4 | 21.5 |
| VBVR-Wan2.2 | 53.2 41.6 | 37.6 16.2 | 29.0 1.2 | 42.6 18.1 | 41.2 19.7 |
| Transition | 1 2 | 2 3 | 3 4 | 4 10 | 10 20 | 20 40 |
| ♠ Unrecognizable | 69.2 | 41.9 | 22.2 | 0 6.8 | 0 0.0 | 0 0.0 |
| ♣ Stable | 17.9 | 49.6 | 70.1 | 69.2 | 75.2 | 90.6 |
| ◼ (a) Correct Wrong | 0 2.6 | 0 0.9 | 0 0.0 | 0 0.9 | 0 0.0 | 0 0.0 |
| ◼ (b) Wrong Correct | 0 0.9 | 0 0.0 | 0 0.9 | 0 0.0 | 0 0.0 | 0 0.0 |
| ◼ (c) Wrong Wrong ′ | 0 9.4 | 0 7.7 | 0 6.8 | 23.1 | 24.8 | 0 9.4 |
Appendix figures & tables21 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
| Structured Puzzles | Visual Organization | Spatiotemporal Dynamics | Physical Manipulation | Total | |
| # tasks | 8 | 5 | 7 | 7 | 27 |
| Planning | Physics | Spatial | Attribute Grounding | Affordance | Topology | Temporal | |
| # tasks | 12 | 8 | 7 | 6 | 5 | 3 | 3 |
| Model | Resolution | Duration (s) | FPS | Price (USD / s) |
| Open Source | ||||
| HY1.5 | 1280 720 | 5/10 | 24 | – |
| Wan2.2 | 1280 720 | 5/10 | 16 | – |
| Mnx-H3 | 960 544 | 5/10 | 24 | – |
| Commercial | ||||
| Sora2 | 1280 720 | 8 | 30 | 0.10 |
| Category | Level | Commercial | Open Source | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Sdce2.0 | Sora2 | Veo3.1 | Kling3.0 | Wan2.7 | Gen4.5 | Mnx-H3 | HY1.5 | Wan2.2 | VBVR-Wan2.2 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Comp. | Rub. | Final | Comp. | Rub. | Final | Comp. | Rub. | Final | Comp. | Rub. | Final | Comp. | Rub. | Final | Comp. | Rub. | Final | Comp. | Rub. | Final | Comp. | Rub. | Final | Comp. | Rub. | Final | Comp. | Rub. | Final | ||
| Visual Org- anization | Easy | 82.0 | 84.8 | 72.6 | 70.0 | 76.1 | 55.6 | 66.0 | 72.5 | 50.3 | 82.0 | 80.4 | 67.6 | 52.0 | 68.6 | 37.0 | 76.0 | 77.5 | 60.5 | 56.0 | 73.4 | 42.8 | 36.0 | 66.7 | 26.6 | 46.0 | 60.2 | 30.4 | 58.0 | 73.6 | 46.1 |
| Mid | 70.0 | 77.3 | 56.4 | 58.0 | 62.7 | 37.0 | 66.0 | 64.4 | 43.3 | 62.0 | 73.2 | 47.5 | 44.0 | 67.1 | 32.2 | 54.0 | 68.1 | 38.3 | 56.0 | 72.6 | 42.3 | 28.0 | 61.0 | 17.9 | 24.0 | 59.9 | 15.3 | 46.0 | 65.7 | 32.4 | |
| Hard | 70.0 | 74.1 | 53.5 | 56.0 | 66.7 | 39.1 | 62.0 | 69.6 | 44.0 | 58.0 | 72.8 | 43.7 | 46.0 | 66.7 | 32.5 | 58.0 | 70.6 | 41.9 | 52.0 | 74.8 | 39.8 | 38.0 | 62.6 | 24.7 | 26.0 | 64.1 | 18.5 | 48.0 | 68.6 | 34.3 | |
| Avg. | 74.0 | 78.8 | 60.8 | 61.3 | 68.5 | 43.9 | 64.7 | 68.8 | 45.9 | 67.3 | 75.4 | 52.9 | 47.3 | 67.5 | 33.9 | 62.7 | 72.0 | 46.9 | 54.7 | 73.6 | 41.6 | 34.0 | 63.4 | 23.1 | 32.0 | 61.4 | 21.4 | 50.7 | 69.3 | 37.6 | |
| Category | Level | Human | Commercial | Open Source | ||||||||
| Sdce2.0 | Sora2 | Veo3.1 | Kling3.0 | Wan2.7 | Gen4.5 | Mnx-H3 | HY1.5 | Wan2.2 | VBVR-Wan2.2 | |||
| Visual Org- anization | Easy | 100.0 | 40.0 | 16.0 | 4.0 | 24.0 | 8.0 | 8.0 | 12.0 | 4.0 | 4.0 | 16.0 |
| Mid | 97.5 | 16.0 | 4.0 | 4.0 | 12.0 | 4.0 | 8.0 | 8.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 4.0 | |
| Hard | 92.5 | 12.0 | 0.0 | 4.0 | 12.0 | 4.0 | 8.0 | 8.0 | 0.0 | 4.0 | 4.0 | |
| Avg. | 96.7 | 22.7 | 6.7 | 4.0 | 16.0 | 5.3 | 8.0 | 9.3 | 1.3 | 2.7 | 8.0 | |
| Spatiotemporal Dynamics | Easy | 100.0 | 5.4 | 5.7 | 0.0 | 10.0 | 5.7 | 5.0 | 8.6 | 0.0 | 2.9 | 5.7 |
| Video Model | Full (N=10) | Half (N=5, main) | (Half Full) |
| Kling3.0 | 34.8 | 33.2 | |
| Sora2 | 30.9 | 27.2 | |
| Veo3.1 | 27.8 | 25.1 | |
| Wan2.2 | 14.3 | 14.0 | |
| HY1.5 | 14.7 | 11.7 | |
| Mean | 24.5 | 22.2 |
| Judge Design | AUC | Pairwise Acc. |
| Main (w/ Gemini-3-Flash ) | 0.803 | 73.2% |
| w/o adaptive fps | 0.772 | 69.5% |
| w/o focus window | 0.753 | 68.3% |
| w/ GPT-5-mini | 0.690 | 64.3% |
| w/ Claude-Haiku-4.5 | 0.478 | 47.9% |
| w/ Qwen3.6-Plus | 0.624 | 59.1% |
| Metric | Structured Puzzles | Visual Organization | Spatiotemporal Dynamics | Physical Manipulation |
| AUC | 0.851 | 0.800 | 0.814 | 0.783 |
| Pairwise Acc. | 75.0% | 69.2% | 74.1% | 70.1% |
Explore similar work
ViGoR-Bench: How Far Are Visual Generative Models From Zero-Shot Visual Reasoners?
performance mirage'' that overlooks the generative process. To address this, we introduce ViGoR Vision-G}nerative Reasoning-centric Benchmark), a unified framework designed to dismantle this mirage. ViGoR distinguishes itself through four key innovations: 1) holistic cross-modal coverage bridging Image-to-Image and Video tasks; 2) a dual-track mechanism evaluating both intermediate processes and final results; 3) an evidence-grounded automated judge ensuring high human alignment; and 4) granular diagnostic analysis that decomposes performance into fine-grained cognitive dimensions. Experiments on over 20 leading models reveal that even state-of-the-art systems harbor significant reasoning deficits, establishing ViGoR as a critical stress test'' for the next generation of intelligent vision models. The demo have been available at https://vincenthancoder.github.io/ViGoR-Bench/