Spatial Reasoning Benchmarks

Ask about this topic

Overview

These benchmarks measure whether AI systems can go beyond recognizing objects to reason about geometry, direction, topology, perspective, and how scenes change over time. They use controlled synthetic puzzles, annotated images and videos, maps, and simulated or real embodied tasks, often with hierarchical tests and executable checks for precise answers or actions. Current models can handle some local relations but often fail at multi-step composition, consistent spatial maps across viewpoints, metric judgments, and long-horizon navigation. Structured representations, tools, active exploration, and targeted training can help, but reliable grounding in visual evidence and fair, standardized evaluation remain open challenges.

Latest papers

CardsList

163 papers35 papers in the last four weeks, up 150% on the four weeks before. 0.2% of all new papers.

Jun 3, 2026

From Symbolic to Geometric: Enabling Spatial Reasoning in Large Language Models

Recent large language models (LLMs) often appear to exhibit spatial reasoning ability; however, this capability is largely symbolic, arising from pattern matching over spatial language rather than true geometric reasoning over space. Because LLMs operate on discrete tokens, they lack native support for continuous spatial representations, explicit geometric computation, and structured spatial operators. To address this limitation, we introduce the Spatial Language Model (SLM), the first multimodal LLM that treats location information as a first-class modality and enables geometric spatial reasoning within the model's inference process. SLM directly operates on learned spatial representations rather than textual descriptions of spatial relations. To support effective training, we construct a Spatial Instruction Dataset that aligns spatial representations, atomic geometric operations, and natural language instructions. We further propose a new benchmark named SpatialEval, which is designed to evaluate spatial reasoning across attributes, distance, topology, and relative-position tasks. Extensive experiments show that SLM significantly outperforms existing LLM-based approaches that rely on symbolic reasoning via prompt engineering or textual abstraction, demonstrating the benefits of integrating geometric spatial representations for robust spatial reasoning. Our instruction dataset, evaluation benchmark, model training codes, and models' checkpoints can be found at: \hyperlink{https://github.com/chuchen2017/SLM}{https://github.com/chuchen2017/SLM}.

Chen Chu, Bita Azarijoo, Li Xiong +2

University of Southern California Los Angeles, CA, USA · Emory University Atlanta, GA, USA · Novateur Research Solutions Ashburn, Virginia, USA

Spatial Reasoning BenchmarksMultimodal Large Language ModelsGeometric Representation LearningSpatial ReasoningSpatial Reasoning in Language Models
AskPDF
Jun 2, 2026

OVO-S-Bench: A Hierarchical Benchmark for Streaming Spatial Intelligence in Multimodal LLMs

Multimodal agents in robotics, AR, and autonomous driving must reason about places and layouts from continuous egocentric streams, often using evidence outside the current view. Existing benchmarks either evaluate offline over full videos or target events rather than spatial structure. We introduce OVO-S-Bench, a fully human-annotated benchmark for streaming spatial intelligence, comprising 1,680 questions over 348 source videos. Annotation involves 12 trained annotators, each also serving as a blind cross-reviewer, across roughly 804 person-hours of multi-round quality assurance. Each question carries a query timestamp and an evidence interval, and at evaluation, the model sees only the prefix preceding the query. Questions span four levels of increasing abstraction: instantaneous egocentric perception, spatiotemporal context tracking, spatial simulation and reasoning, and allocentric mapping. Across 38 proprietary and open-source MLLMs, Gemini-3.1-Pro trails human experts by 27 points, 59.2 vs. 86.6, with allocentric mapping as the dominant bottleneck. Notably, streaming and spatially fine-tuned MLLMs underperform their own backbones. We further find that chain-of-thought reasoning amplifies spatial errors when ungrounded in the stream. By exposing these limitations, OVO-S-Bench establishes a demanding testbed for next-generation streaming spatial MLLMs.

Yifei Li, Pengyiang Liu, Yuhang Zang +4

Tsinghua University · Shanghai AI Laboratory · Beihang University

Spatial Reasoning BenchmarksSpatiotemporal ReasoningEgocentric Video UnderstandingMultimodal QAMultimodal Model EvaluationMultimodal Understanding
AskPDF
Jun 2, 2026

Eliciting Complex Spatial Reasoning in MLLMs through Wide-Baseline Matching

Wide-baseline matching (WBM) requires integrating geometric understanding, viewpoint changes, fine-grained perception, and occlusion reasoning, making it a challenging testbed for spatial reasoning in multimodal large language models (MLLMs) deployed in physical environments. However, current MLLMs lack systematic evaluation and training frameworks for these capabilities. We introduce ReasonMatch-Bench, a benchmark stratified by viewpoint displacement and matching granularity across indoor, outdoor, and object-centric scenarios, and show that current MLLMs still struggle with fine-grained wide-baseline correspondence: on a difficult 90-sample subset, human annotators achieve 84.0 F1, while the best existing baseline reaches 37.2. To bridge this gap, we build a scalable data-generation pipeline that automatically extracts wide-baseline view pairs from large-scale video-3D corpora, including RGB-D videos and SfM reconstructions, yielding diverse and verifiable supervision. We further propose Dynamic Correspondence Reinforcement Learning (DCRL), which combines Image-Level Viewpoint Progression and Point-Level Correspondence Curriculum to improve WBM training through verifiable rewards without explicit CoT supervision. Extensive experiments show that DCRL substantially improves ReasonMatch-Bench and transfers to related spatial benchmarks, while maintaining general visual understanding performance with modest gains on several benchmarks.

Hao Zhong, Muzhi Zhu, Shenyan Zeng +8

State Key Laboratory of CAD & CG, Zhejiang University · Ant Group · Westlake University

VLM EvaluationSpatial Reasoning BenchmarksVisual Spatial ReasoningVLMs for RoboticsRL for VLMs
AskPDF
Jun 1, 2026

Consistent Yet Wrong: Evidence Insensitivity in Spatial Vision-Language Models

Spatial reasoning is fundamental to robotics, autonomy, and embodied AI, yet modern vision-language models (VLMs) remain unreliable on metric distance queries. A common assumption is that consistent predictions across viewpoints reflect geometric grounding. We test this assumption and find the opposite: leading VLMs often produce view-invariant and consistent answers even when those answers are incorrect, indicating weak coupling between predictions and viewpoint-specific visual evidence. We introduce ViewDiag, a controlled multi-view evaluation protocol built from Hypersim, ScanNet, and KITTI360, comprising 176 object-pair tracks across 80 scenes with 2--10 views per track. The protocol evaluates models along three axes: metric accuracy, distributional concentration, and internal collapse, the last of which is assessed using a latent feature probe. Across diverse models, we observe a consistent pattern of high prediction stability paired with substantial error, clustering in a regime characterized by strong consistency but low accuracy. \noindent These results challenge the common use of cross-view consistency as a proxy for geometric understanding. Instead, we show that stable predictions may reflect prior-driven collapse rather than evidence-sensitive reasoning. ViewDiag provides a controlled benchmark and diagnostic framework for evaluating whether spatial VLMs are not only accurate, but also meaningfully coupled to visual evidence.

S Divakar Bhat, Toshihiko Yamasaki

The University of Tokyo, Japan

VLM EvaluationMulti-View ConsistencyVLM RobustnessSpatial Reasoning BenchmarksVisual Spatial ReasoningVisually Grounded Reasoning+1
AskPDF
Jun 1, 2026

PlanarBench: Evaluating LLM Spatial Reasoning via Planar Graph Drawing

Existing LLM graph benchmarks typically ask models to answer graph-theoretic questions or compute symbolic solutions rather than construct spatial layouts. Within-task difficulty is also primarily stratified by vertex count. However, existing research also suggests that task difficulty is more closely related to the number of constraints imposed by the edges than to the number of vertices being arranged. We introduce PlanarBench, a benchmark that asks models to produce crossing-free ASCII drawings of planar graphs given only an edge list. Across 91 model configurations and 199 non-isomorphic connected planar graphs with 2-7 vertices, edge count is more strongly associated with mean task score than vertex count (r=−0.85r=-0.85) versus (r=−0.47r=-0.47) and remains strongly associated after controlling for vertex count (rp=−0.80r_p=-0.80). PlanarBench provides a controlled setting for separating these two difficulty axes. In addition, neither drawing area nor total response length demonstrated a meaningful correlation with score, which is evidence against a simple output-size explanation. Performance varies widely: the best model scores 159.5 out of 199, most models below 30B parameters score under 25, and substantial failures remain among frontier systems.

Oleksandr Nikitin, Anna Kravchenko

Spatial Reasoning BenchmarksLLM EvaluationLLM Reasoning with GraphsSpatial Reasoning
AskPDF
May 29, 2026

ERGeoBench:A Comprehensive Benchmark for Embodied Reasoning and Geo-localization in Multimodal Large Language Models

Multimodal large language models (MLLMs) have shown strong potential as embodied agents, yet embodied geo-localization remains underexplored due to the lack of fine-grained evaluation. We introduce ERGeoBench, a diagnostic benchmark for vision-driven embodied geo-localization. ERGeoBench evaluates models under three progressive settings -- single-view, panorama-view, and embodied-view -- where agents may actively acquire observations through sequential changes in yaw, pitch, and zoom. The benchmark contains 2,207 globally distributed street-view panoramas and measures four complementary capabilities: foundational perception, spatial awareness, common sense reasoning, and geo-localization reasoning. Evaluations of leading proprietary and open-source MLLMs show that current models can infer high-level geographic semantics, but still struggle with fine-grained perceptual operations, metric localization, and spatial consistency across views. We further observe that geo-localization is strongly correlated with the other capability dimensions, suggesting that accurate localization depends on integrated perception, spatial reasoning, and commonsense inference rather than isolated visual recognition. Overall, ERGeoBench provides a unified framework for diagnosing and advancing human-like embodied geo-localization. Project Page: https://kaixuewen.github.io/ERGeoBench/

Kaiwen Xue, Tao Wei, Guoxin Zhang +5

Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunications, Beijing, China · State Key Laboratory of Networking and Switching Technology, Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunications, Beijing, China · School of Materials Science and Engineering, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China +2

Multimodal Large Language ModelsVisual Spatial ReasoningMultimodal Model EvaluationSpatial Reasoning BenchmarksGeospatial ReasoningVisually Grounded Reasoning+1
AskPDF
May 29, 2026

SpatialAct: Probing Spatial Reasoning-to-Action Capabilities of VLM Agents in 3D Scenes

Humans can effortlessly perceive spatial layouts, form cognitive representations, reason about spatial relations, and translate such reasoning into actions in everyday 3D environments. Although recent vision-language models (VLMs) have shown promising performance on observation-conditioned spatial perception and reasoning tasks, it remains unclear whether they can build coherent spatial understanding, act upon it, and refine their actions through multi-turn feedback. To study this problem, we introduce SpatialAct, a simulator-grounded benchmark for probing action-conditioned spatial reasoning in 3D scenes. Starting from the most challenging setting, Multi-turn Interactive Refinement, we further design its decomposed counterpart, Single-step Error Detection and Fix, together with five fundamental spatial ability tasks to diagnose the underlying causes of model failures. Experiments reveal a clear reasoning-to-action gap: current VLMs can perform well on isolated spatial reasoning tasks, but struggle to maintain coherent spatial beliefs and produce reliable actions during multi-turn feedback, substantially underperforming humans. These results suggest that current VLM agents still lack robust spatial state tracking under action-induced environment changes, even when low-level control is abstracted away.

Tianhui Liu, Jie Feng, Zhiheng Zheng +6

1The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology (Guangzhou) · 2Zhongguancun Academy · 3Tsinghua University +1

Vision-Language AgentsVisual Spatial Reasoning3D Spatial ReasoningSpatial Reasoning BenchmarksVisually Grounded ReasoningSpatial Reasoning+2
AskPDF
May 28, 2026

Seeing Isn't Knowing: Do VLMs Know When Not to Answer Spatial Questions (and Why)?

Spatial reasoning benchmarks typically evaluate whether vision-language models can derive the correct answer from a visual observation. Yet in real 3D environments, the observation itself may be unreliable: occlusion can remove task-relevant evidence, while perspective can make visible geometry misleading. Reliable spatial reasoning therefore requires more than answering a question correctly. A model must also assess whether its current observation provides sufficient and trustworthy evidence for that answer. We introduce SPATIALUNCERTAIN, a controlled evaluation framework for studying viewpoint-dependent observational uncertainty. We study two complementary failure modes: missing evidence caused by occlusion and misleading evidence caused by perspective. We further evaluate whether models can recognize when the current view is unreliable and identify a more informative observation. Across eight open- and closed-source vision-language models, we find that model behavior does not track the reliability of visual evidence. Models do not reliably become more cautious as evidence disappears, and under perspective conflict, their judgments increasingly follow projected appearance rather than the unchanged physical 3D relation. Internal analysis suggests a corresponding representational asymmetry: projected 2D relations are readily available, whereas the underlying physical 3D relation is barely decodable. Moreover, models that can identify an informative viewpoint when explicitly asked often fail to recognize when such an additional view is needed. These failures are not fully resolved by prompting or fine-tuning, and providing a better viewpoint is substantially more effective than adding depth information to the same misleading observation. Our results identify assessing the reliability of visual observations as a distinct and missing component of current spatial reasoning evaluation.

Yue Zhang, Zun Wang, Han Lin +3

UNC Chapel Hill · Google Research

VLM EvaluationSpatial Reasoning BenchmarksUncertainty Estimation for VLA ModelsVision-Language Models3D Spatial ReasoningVisually Grounded Reasoning+2
AskPDF
May 28, 2026

Why Far Looks Up: Probing Spatial Representation in Vision-Language Models

Vision-language models (VLMs) achieve strong performance on spatial reasoning benchmarks, yet it remains unclear whether this reflects structured 3D understanding or reliance on statistical shortcuts in natural images. We introduce a representation-level analysis framework that constructs minimal contrastive pairs to measure how spatial axes are organized and disentangled within VLM embeddings. Our analysis across multiple model families reveals a consistent vertical-distance entanglement: models conflate vertical image position with distance, mirroring the perspective bias of natural photographs. This bias produces a significant accuracy gap between perspective-consistent and counter-heuristic examples, and intensifies under data scaling even as overall benchmark accuracy improves. We further show that models with similar benchmark scores can exhibit different internal representations, and that these differences predict accuracy and robustness across diverse spatial reasoning benchmarks. To isolate this bias from evaluation-set skew, we introduce SpatialTunnel, a synthetic benchmark designed to expose spatial shortcut biases by removing common correlations present in natural images. Experiments confirm that the entanglement is model-intrinsic, and that models with well-separated spatial axes exhibit greater robustness, suggesting that well-structured spatial representations lead to more reliable spatial reasoning across diverse benchmarks. Code and benchmark are available on the project page: https://cheolhong0916.github.io/whyfarlooksup.github.io/.

Cheolhong Min, Jaeyun Jung, Daeun Lee +5

Seoul National University · The Ohio State University · NVIDIA

Representation LearningVisual Spatial ReasoningVLM InterpretabilitySpatial Reasoning BenchmarksVLM EvaluationPosition Bias in VLMs+1
AskPDF
May 27, 2026

Embodied3DBench: Benchmarking Low-Level Embodied Spatial Intelligence of Vision Language Models

Are current Vision Language Models (VLMs) ready to comprehend and reason about complex embodied interactions in 3D environments? We introduce Embodied3DBench, a robot-centric benchmark targeting low-level spatial intelligence in embodied 3D environments. To systematically evaluate these foundational perceptual capabilities, the benchmark includes 6 task categories divided into two core groups: Spatial Structural Understanding (Grounding, Spatial Relation Prediction, and Multi-view Correspondence) and Interaction-Oriented Perception (Affordance Prediction, Grasp Point Prediction, and Trajectory Prediction). The benchmark spans 12 subcategories and contains over 21k high-quality question-answer pairs. We evaluate 13 state-of-the-art models, and the results show that while current models exhibit relatively strong high-level spatial reasoning, such as understanding object-to-object positional relations, they remain fragile in interaction-oriented perception, highlighting a significant lack of robust 3D-aware interaction priors. To actively bridge this capability gap revealed by our benchmark, we further synthesize a large-scale training dataset comprising 1.3M QA pairs. Notably, fine-tuning on this dataset yields significant improvements in low-level spatial intelligence. Ultimately, Embodied3DBench fills a critical gap by providing both a systematic evaluation framework and a scalable data solution, setting a clear target for the development of interaction-aware multimodal systems.

Jiyao Zhang, Mingxu Zhang, Yitong Peng +8

CFCS, School of CS, PKU Beijing, China · BUPT Beijing, China · PKU Beijing, China +2

VLM EvaluationSpatial Reasoning BenchmarksRobotic Grasping3D Spatial ReasoningRobot Manipulation Benchmarks3D Visual Grounding
AskPDF
May 27, 2026

Do LLMs Build World Models From Text? A Multilingual Diagnostic of Spatial Reasoning

Whether large language models (LLMs) construct internal spatial world models from pure-text descriptions remains contested, and whether such capabilities transfer across languages has not been systematically studied. We introduce MentalMap, a multilingual diagnostic benchmark with a six-level capability hierarchy (L0-L5) spanning atomic spatial facts to generative world-graph construction, together with four diagnostic axes probing frame of reference, reading-direction bias, reasoning-effort allocation, and hallucination. MentalMap is built from 100 ProcTHOR household scenes, covers eight typologically diverse languages plus a structured-text control, and contains 39 task families across 1,950 evaluation cells. Evaluating thirteen LLMs across scales and model families, we identify a universal L3 reasoning cliff: no model retains even half of its L0 performance on viewpoint reasoning once baseline atomic accuracy exceeds 40%. The cliff persists across languages, scales, and prompting strategies, while structured-output failures and reasoning patterns vary substantially across models. Human evaluation under the identical pure-text protocol reproduces the same failure pattern, suggesting that the bottleneck arises from text-only working memory constraints rather than being specific to current LLM architectures. Our findings reframe pure-text spatial reasoning as a multi-axis world-modeling problem and motivate multimodal and scratchpad-augmented reasoning as future directions.

Zhikai Pan, Chih-Ting Liao, Chunrui Liu +5

University of New South Wales · Essential Energy · University of Alabama at Birmingham +3

LLM World ModelsMultilingual Language Model EvaluationSpatial Reasoning BenchmarksWorld Model LearningSpatial Reasoning in Language ModelsCross-Lingual Reasoning in Language Models+1
AskPDF
May 23, 2026

EgoProx: Evaluating MLLMs on Egocentric 3D Proximity Reasoning Across a Cognitive Hierarchy

Humans constantly reason about 3D proximity, the relations between their body and surrounding objects, to guide perception and action in daily life. Whether multimodal large language models (MLLMs) can perform such embodied 3D reasoning remains unclear. To this end, we introduce EgoProx, a benchmark for egocentric 3D proximity reasoning. We organize our tasks along a cognitive chain, covering intention, exploration, exploitation, and chain-of-actions reasoning. We also design an agent based data engine that produces diverse and consistent QA pairs at scale. We benchmark prevailing MLLMs on EgoProx and conduct additional analyses with dataset specific and task specific instruction tuning. We observe large cross-domain gains, indicating that current MLLMs contain some spatial knowledge; however, they still struggle to effectively leverage it for spatial reasoning VQA.

Jinzhao Li, Yinuo Chen, Dongxu Piao +9

College of AI, Tsinghua University · 2ByteDance · 3State Key Laboratory of General Artificial Intelligence, BIGAI

Embodied ReasoningLLM Evaluation3D Spatial ReasoningEmbodied QAMultimodal Large Language ModelsSpatial Reasoning Benchmarks+2
AskPDF
May 21, 2026

SpaceDG: Benchmarking Spatial Intelligence under Visual Degradation

Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) have made rapid progress in spatial intelligence, yet existing spatial reasoning benchmarks largely assume pristine visual inputs and overlook the degradations that commonly occur in real-world deployment, such as motion blur, low light, adverse weather, lens distortion, and compression artifacts. This raises a fundamental question: how robust is the spatial intelligence of current MLLMs when visual observations are imperfect? To answer this question, we introduce SpaceDG, the first large-scale dataset for degradation-aware spatial understanding. It is constructed with a physically grounded degradation synthesis engine that embeds degradation formation process into 3D Gaussian Splatting (3DGS) rendering, enabling realistic simulation of nine degradation types. The resulting dataset contains approximately 1M QA pairs from nearly 1,000 indoor scenes. We further introduce SpaceDG-Bench, an human-verified benchmark with 1,102 questions spanning 11 reasoning categories and 9 visual degradation types, yielding over 10K VQA instances. Evaluating 25 open- and closed-source MLLMs reveals that visual degradations consistently and substantially impair spatial reasoning, exposing a critical robustness gap. Finally, we show that finetuning on SpaceDG markedly improves degradation robustness and can even surpass human performance under degraded conditions without any performance drop on clean images, highlighting the promise of degradation-aware training for robust spatial intelligence.

Xiaolong Zhou, Yifei Liu, Ziyang Gong +8

2Shanghai Artificial Intelligence Laboratory · University of Electronic Science and Technology of China · 6Beihang University +4

VLM RobustnessSpatial Reasoning BenchmarksVisual Spatial ReasoningSpatial Reasoning
AskPDF
May 20, 2026

ArchSIBench: Benchmarking the Architectural Spatial Intelligence of Vision-Language Models

Architectural spatial intelligence, the ability to recognize and infer architectural space, is fundamental to tasks such as robot navigation, embodied interaction, and 3D scene understanding and generation. Although extensive research has evaluated the basic spatial skills of Vision-Language Models (VLMs) such as relative orientation, distance comparison, and object counting, these tasks cover only the most elementary levels of spatial cognition and largely overlook higher-level cognition of architectural space, including layout understanding, circulation patterns, and functional zoning. In this work, we present ArchSIBench, a Benchmark for Architectural Spatial Intelligence based on the perspectives from architecture, cognitive science, and psychology. ArchSIBench covers five core dimensions: perception, reasoning, navigation, transformation, and configuration, comprising 17 fine-grained subtasks. Through careful manual annotation by experts with architectural backgrounds, we construct 3,000 question-answer pairs to enable comprehensive evaluation of architectural spatial intelligence. Based on ArchSIBench, we evaluate various VLMs and find that the architectural spatial intelligence of most models shows significant differences from human baselines; additionally, models exhibit substantial variability across capability dimensions. Some state-of-the-art models can approach the level of human evaluators without architectural training. However, a clear gap remains compared to human evaluators with architectural training, particularly in spatial transformation and configuration reasoning. We believe that ArchSIBench will provide important insights and systematic resources for measuring and advancing the architectural spatial intelligence of VLMs. The dataset and code are available at https://huggingface.co/datasets/ArchSIBench/ArchSIBench.

Qirui Shen, Wenda Wang, Jiachen Lu +5

School of Architecture, Tsinghua University

VLM EvaluationSpatial Reasoning BenchmarksVisual Spatial ReasoningSpatial Reasoning
AskPDF
May 19, 2026

Do Vision-Language Models Understand 3D Scenes or Just Catalogue Objects?

Vision-language models reliably name objects in a scene, but do they represent the 3D layout those objects inhabit? We introduce a 3,034-sample human-curated benchmark targeting three components of spatial understanding: depth-ordered occlusion (probed via three independent counterfactual operationalisations), optical-geometry inference over visible reflections, and volumetric rearrangement planning. Six frontier and open-weight VLMs, scored by trained annotators on 18,204 responses with no LLM-as-judge, reveal a sharp dissociation: models that plan rearrangements over visible layouts at 53--97% accuracy and rarely violate collision constraints fall to 6--45% on occlusion and below 7% on reflections. An embodied-reasoning model reproduces the same profile. White-box analysis on Qwen3-VL-8B-Thinking localises the failure to the visual-token merger: spatial information recoverable throughout the vision encoder becomes inaccessible after token compression and only stabilises again when clean post-merger activations are patched into the language decoder.

Animesh Maheshwari, Divyansh Sahu, Nishit Verma

Deccan AI

VLM EvaluationSpatial Reasoning BenchmarksOcclusion Reasoning3D Spatial ReasoningVLM InterpretabilityVisually Grounded Reasoning
AskPDF
May 18, 2026

ESI-Bench: Towards Embodied Spatial Intelligence that Closes the Perception-Action Loop

Spatial intelligence unfolds through a perception-action loop: agents act to acquire observations, and reason about how observations vary as a function of action. Rather than passively processing what is seen, they actively uncover what is unseen - occluded structure, dynamics, containment, and functionality that cannot be resolved from passive sensing alone. We move beyond prior formulations of spatial intelligence that assume oracle observations by recasting the observer as an actor. We introduce ESI-BENCH, a comprehensive benchmark for embodied spatial intelligence spanning 10 task categories and 29 subcategories built on OmniGibson, grounded in Spelke's core knowledge systems. Agents must decide what abilities to deploy - perception, locomotion, and manipulation - and how to sequence them to actively accumulate task-relevant evidence. We conduct extensive experiments on state-of-the-art MLLMs and find that active exploration substantially outperforms passive counterparts, with agents spontaneously discovering emergent spatial strategies without explicit instructions, while random multi-view often adds noise rather than signal despite consuming far more images. Most failures stem not from weak perception but from action blindness: poor action choices lead to poor observations, which in turn drive cascading errors. While explicit 3D grounding stabilizes reasoning on depth-sensitive tasks, imperfect 3D representation proves more harmful than 2D baselines by distorting spatial relations. Human studies further reveal that unlike humans who seek falsifying viewpoints and revise beliefs under contradiction, models commit prematurely with high confidence regardless of evidence quality, exposing a metacognitive gap that neither better perception nor more embodied interaction alone can close.

Yining Hong, Jiageng Liu, Han Yin +5

1Stanford University · 2UCLA · 3Northwestern University

Active PerceptionSpatial Reasoning Benchmarks3D Spatial ReasoningEmbodied Spatial ReasoningAI Agent BenchmarksActive Sensing+2
AskPDF
May 18, 2026

QSTRBench: a New Benchmark to Evaluate the Ability of Language Models to Reason with Qualitative Spatial and Temporal Calculi

We introduce an extensive qualitative spatial and temporal reasoning (QSTR) benchmark for evaluating large language models (LLMs). We pose questions concerning compositional reasoning (using composition tables, CT), converse relations, and conceptual neighbourhoods (CN) for QSTR calculi, Point Algebra (PA), Allen's Interval Algebra, Interval and Duration (INDU), Region Connection Calculus (RCC-5, RCC-8, and RCC-22), the nine intersection model, cardinal direction calculus, and STAR. The RCC-22 CN is published here for the first time. An extended benchmark systematically varies question presentation including prefix/infix, words/symbols/nonce terms and schematic descriptions for selected calculi. We report results for contemporary frontier models. All models tested perform better than guessing but none can consistently answer all questions correctly. Performance varies sharply by calculus, with PA being the most straightforward, and RCC-22 the most difficult. We release the benchmark, and our results under an open licence to facilitate further assessment of qualitative spatio/temporal reasoning in LLMs.

Anthony G. Cohn, Robert E. Blackwell

School of Computer Science, The University of Leeds, Woodhouse Lane, Leeds, LS2 9JT, UK · The Alan Turing Institute, British Library, 96 Euston Road, London, NW1 2DB, UK · Tongji University, Shanghai, China

Spatial Reasoning BenchmarksLLM EvaluationSpatiotemporal ReasoningLLM Reasoning
AskPDF
May 13, 2026

CurveBench: A Benchmark for Exact Topological Reasoning over Nested Jordan Curves

We introduce CurveBench, a benchmark for hierarchical topological reasoning from visual input. CurveBench consists of 756 images of pairwise non-intersecting Jordan curves across easy, polygonal, topographic-inspired, maze-like, and dense counting configurations. Each image is annotated with a rooted tree encoding the containment relations between planar regions. We formulate the task as structured prediction: given an image, a model must recover the full rooted containment tree induced by the curves. Despite the visual simplicity of the task, the strongest evaluated model, Gemini 3.1 Pro, achieves only 71.1% tree-generation accuracy on CurveBench-Easy and 19.1% on CurveBench-Hard. We further demonstrate benchmark utility through RLVR-style fine-tuning of open-weight vision-language models. Our trained Qwen3-VL-8B model improves over Qwen-3-VL-8B-Thinking from 2.8% to 33.3% tree-generation accuracy on CurveBench-Easy, exceeding GPT-5.4 and Claude Opus 4.5 under our evaluation protocol. The remaining gap, especially on CurveBench-Hard, shows that exact topology-aware visual reasoning remains far from solved.

Amirreza Mohseni, Mona Mohammadi, Morteza Saghafian +1

Maastricht University · Cornell University · TU Wien +1

VLM EvaluationSpatial Reasoning BenchmarksVisual Spatial ReasoningVisual ReasoningStructured ReasoningVisually Grounded Reasoning
AskPDF
May 12, 2026

3D Primitives are a Spatial Language for VLMs

Vision-language models (VLMs) exhibit a striking paradox: they can generate executable code that reconstructs a 3D scene from geometric primitives with correct object counts, classes, and approximate positions, yet the same models fail at simpler spatial questions on the same image. We show that 3D geometric primitives (cubes, spheres, cylinders, expressed in executable code) serve as a powerful intermediate representation for spatial understanding, and exploit this through three contributions. First, we introduce SpatialBabel, a benchmark evaluating fourteen VLMs on primitive-based 3D scene reconstruction across six scene-code languages (programming languages and declarative formats for 3D primitive scenes), revealing that a single model's object-detection F1 can vary by up to 5.7×5.7\times across languages. Second, we propose Code-CoT (Code Chain-of-Thought), a training-free inference strategy that routes spatial reasoning through primitive-based code generation. Code-CoT lifts the SpatialBabel-QA-Score by up to +6.4+6.4% on primitive scenes and real-photo CV-Bench-3D accuracy by +5.0+5.0% for VLMs with strong coding capabilities. Third, we propose \textbf{S3^{3}-FT} (Self-Supervised Spatial Fine-Tuning), which self-supervisedly distills primitive spatial knowledge into general visual reasoning by parsing the model's own Three.js primitive-reconstructions into structured annotations and fine-tuning on the result, with no human labels and no teacher model. Training on primitive images alone, S3^3-FT improves Qwen3-VL-8B by +4.6+4.6 to +8.6+8.6% on SpatialBabel-Primitive-QA, +9.7+9.7% on CV-Bench-2D, and +17+17% on HallusionBench; the recipe transfers across model families. These results establish geometric primitives in code as both a diagnostic and a transferable spatial vocabulary for VLMs. We will release all artifacts upon publication.

Junze Liu, Kun Qian, Florian Dubost +8

Unity Technologies

Visually Grounded Reasoning3D Spatial ReasoningSpatial Reasoning BenchmarksCoT ReasoningVLM ReasoningSpatial Reasoning in Language Models+1
AskPDF
May 12, 2026

Beyond Localization: A Comprehensive Benchmark of Perspective-Conditioned Spatial Reasoning in MLLMs from Omnidirectional Images

Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) show strong visual perception, yet remain limited in reasoning about space under changing viewpoints. We study this challenge as Perspective-Conditioned Spatial Reasoning (PCSR) in 360 degree omnidirectional images, where broad scene coverage reduces ambiguity from partial observations without eliminating the need for viewpoint-dependent inference. To assess this capability, we introduce PCSR-Bench, a diagnostic benchmark of 84,373 QA pairs from 2,600 omnidirectional images across 26 indoor environments, organized into eight tasks under three cognitive groups--- Perception, Spatial, and advanced PCSR. We evaluate 14 representative MLLMs and observe a substantial perception--reasoning gap: accuracy reaches 57.59% on Limited Field-of-View Reasoning (T7) but drops to 13.49%, 7.13%, and 0.64% on Relative Direction (T2), Egocentric Rotation (T4), and open-ended Compositional Directional Chains (T3), respectively. To probe the plasticity of this gap, we conduct an RL-based diagnostic study on a 7B-scale model. Reward shaping improves a matched 7B baseline from 31.10% to 60.06% under a controlled setting, suggesting that PCSR exhibits partial plasticity rather than being fully immutable. Still, these gains are task-selective, sensitive to reward design, and partially dependent on the evaluation protocol. These results position PCSR as a key bottleneck in current MLLMs and highlight meaningful yet bounded room for recovery under targeted optimization. Details and access are available at https://github.com/Caleb-ychen/PCSR-Benchmark.

Yuangong Chen, Wai Keung Wong, Jiaxing Li +2

The Hong Kong Polytechnic University Hong Kong, China · Guangzhou University Guangzhou, China · Queen Mary, University of London London, United Kingdom +1

Spatial Reasoning BenchmarksVisual Spatial ReasoningMultimodal Large Language ModelsVisually Grounded ReasoningSpatial Reasoning
AskPDF
May 11, 2026

SleepWalk: A Three-Tier Benchmark for Stress-Testing Instruction-Guided Vision-Language Navigation

Vision-Language Models (VLMs) have advanced rapidly in multimodal perception and language understanding, yet it remains unclear whether they can reliably ground language into spatially coherent, plausibly executable actions in 3D digital environments. We introduce SleepWalk, a benchmark for evaluating instruction-grounded trajectory prediction in single-scene 3D worlds generated from textual scene descriptions and filtered for navigability. Unlike prior navigation benchmarks centered on long-range exploration across rooms, SleepWalk targets localized, interaction-centric embodied reasoning: given rendered visual observations and a natural-language instruction, a model must predict a trajectory that respects scene geometry, avoids collisions, and terminates at an action-compatible location. The benchmark covers diverse indoor and outdoor environments and organizes tasks into three tiers of spatial and temporal difficulty, enabling fine-grained analysis of grounding under increasing compositional complexity. Using a standardized pointwise judge-based evaluation protocol, we evaluate three frontier VLMs on 2,472 curated 3D environments with nine instructions per scene. Results reveal systematic failures in grounded spatial reasoning, especially under occlusion, interaction constraints, and multi-step instructions: performance drops as the difficulty level of the tasks increase. In general, current VLMs can somewhat produce trajectories that are simultaneously spatially coherent, plausibly executable, and aligned with intended actions. By exposing failures in a controlled yet scalable setting, SleepWalk provides a critical benchmark for advancing grounded multimodal reasoning, embodied planning, vision-language navigation, and action-capable agents in 3D environments.

Niyati Rawal, Sushant Ravva, Shah Alam Abir +5

† Indian AI Research Organization (IAIRO), India · ⋆ĸragya Lab, BITS Pilani Goa, India · ¶ University of Dhaka, Bangladesh +3

VLM EvaluationSpatial Reasoning BenchmarksVisual Spatial ReasoningVLN BenchmarksVision-Language NavigationVisually Grounded Reasoning
AskPDF
May 11, 2026

The Cartesian Shortcut: Re-evaluate Vision Reasoning in Polar Coordinate Space

As current Multimodal Large Language Models rapidly saturate canonical visual reasoning benchmarks, a key question emerges: do these strong scores genuinely reflect robust visual understanding? We identify a pervasive vulnerability, the Cartesian Shortcut: models frequently discretize the orthogonal grid-based layouts prevalent in visual reasoning benchmarks into explicit textual coordinates, offloading reasoning from visual perception to text-based deduction. To re-evaluate visual reasoning when this shortcut is unavailable, we introduce Polaris-Bench, which re-formulates 53 visual reasoning tasks in Polar coordinate space with paired Cartesian counterparts that preserve task semantics, disrupting the orthogonal structure that models exploit. Comprehensive evaluation across 1414 state-of-the-art MLLMs reveals that frontier models achieving 6969--83%83\% on Cartesian layouts collapse to 3131--39%39\% on Polar equivalents. Moreover, thinking gains largely vanish on Polar layouts, prompting interventions fail to close the gap, and comparable drops arise on other non-orthogonal layouts. These findings reveal that current MLLMs' visual reasoning performance is strongly coupled to orthogonal grid structure, a fragility that is consistent across model families but far smaller in humans, who maintain 88.8% accuracy on Polar layouts. The benchmark, evaluation suite, and leaderboard are publicly available at https://google-deepmind.github.io/polaris-bench.

Xia Hu, Zhenrui Yue, Brian Potetz +4

Google DeepMind · Stanford University · Google Research

VLM EvaluationSpatial Reasoning BenchmarksVision-Language ModelsVisual ReasoningVisually Grounded ReasoningMultimodal Foundation Models+1
AskPDF
May 4, 2026

From Where Things Are to What They Are For: Benchmarking Spatial-Functional Intelligence in Multimodal LLMs

Human-level agentic intelligence extends beyond low-level geometric perception, evolving from recognizing where things are to understanding what they are for. While existing benchmarks effectively evaluate the geometric perception capabilities of multimodal large language models (MLLMs), they fall short of probing the higher-order cognitive abilities required for grounded intelligence. To address this gap, we introduce the Spatial-Functional Intelligence Benchmark (SFI-Bench), a video-based benchmark with over 1,500 expert-annotated questions derived from diverse egocentric indoor video scans. SFI-Bench systematically evaluates two complementary dimensions of advanced reasoning: (1) Structured Spatial Reasoning, which requires understanding complex layouts and forming coherent spatial representations, and (2) Functional Reasoning, which involves inferring object affordances and their context-dependent utility. The benchmark includes tasks such as conditional counting, multi-hop relational reasoning, functional pairing, and knowledge-grounded troubleshooting, directly challenging models to integrate perception, memory, and inference. Our experiments reveal that current MLLMs consistently struggle to combine spatial memory with functional reasoning and external knowledge, highlighting a critical bottleneck in achieving grounded intelligence. SFI-Bench therefore provides a diagnostic tool for measuring progress toward more cognitively capable and truly grounded multimodal agents.

Le Zhang, Jihan Yang, Soundarya Krishnan +11

1Mila - Qu´ebec AI Institute, UdeM · 2NYU · 3Apple +1

Spatial Reasoning BenchmarksVisual Spatial ReasoningMultimodal Large Language ModelsVideo ReasoningMultimodal Model Evaluation
AskPDF
Apr 27, 2026

ReVSI: Rebuilding Visual Spatial Intelligence Evaluation for Accurate Assessment of VLM 3D Reasoning

Current evaluations of spatial intelligence can be systematically invalid under modern vision-language model (VLM) settings. First, many benchmarks derive question-answer (QA) pairs from point-cloud-based 3D annotations originally curated for traditional 3D perception. When such annotations are treated as ground truth for video-based evaluation, reconstruction and annotation artifacts can miss objects that are clearly visible in the video, mislabel object identities, or corrupt geometry-dependent answers (e.g., size), yielding incorrect or ambiguous QA pairs. Second, evaluations often assume full-scene access, while many VLMs operate on sparsely sampled frames (e.g., 16-64), making many questions effectively unanswerable under the actual model inputs. We improve evaluation validity by introducing ReVSI, a benchmark and protocol that ensures each QA pair is answerable and correct under the model's actual inputs. To this end, we re-annotate objects and geometry across 381 scenes from 5 datasets to improve data quality, and regenerate all QA pairs with rigorous bias mitigation and human verification using professional 3D annotation tools. We further enhance evaluation controllability by providing variants across multiple frame budgets (16/32/64/all) and fine-grained object visibility metadata, enabling controlled diagnostic analyses. Evaluations of general and domain-specific VLMs on ReVSI reveal systematic failure modes that are obscured by prior benchmarks, yielding a more reliable and diagnostic assessment of spatial intelligence.

Yiming Zhang, Jiacheng Chen, Jiaqi Tan +3

1Simon Fraser University · 2Hong Kong University of Science and Technology · University of Waterloo +1

VLM EvaluationSpatial Reasoning Benchmarks3D Spatial Reasoning3D Scene Understanding
AskPDF
Apr 24, 2026

SpaMEM: Benchmarking Dynamic Spatial Reasoning via Perception-Memory Integration in Embodied Environments

Multimodal large language models (MLLMs) have advanced static visual--spatial reasoning, yet they often fail to preserve long-horizon spatial coherence in embodied settings where beliefs must be continuously revised from egocentric observations under environmental change. We introduce SpaMEM (Spatial Memory from Action Sequences), a large-scale diagnostic benchmark that isolates the mechanics of spatial belief evolution via action-conditioned scene transformations (spawn, place, remove) over long interaction horizons. SpaMEM is built on a physically grounded dataset with 10,601,392 high-fidelity images across four modalities (RGB, depth, instance, semantic segmentation), collected from 25,000+ interaction sequences in 1,000 procedurally generated houses. We formalize embodied spatial reasoning as a three-level hierarchy with 15 diagnostic tasks: Level 1 measures atomic spatial perception from single observations; Level 2 probes temporal reasoning with oracle textual state histories to factor out perceptual noise; and Level 3 requires end-to-end belief maintenance from raw visual streams under the same task dimensions. We further evaluate both short-term (step-wise) updates and long-term (episodic) reconstruction. Benchmarking representative open-source VLM families reveals a consistent stacked bottleneck: coordinate-consistent grounding remains a hard ceiling, and the sharp collapse from Level 2 to Level 3 exposes a pronounced symbolic scaffolding dependency, where models succeed with text-based bookkeeping but struggle to sustain robust visual memory. SpaMEM provides a granular diagnostic standard and motivates explicit mechanisms for state representation, belief revision, and long-horizon episodic integration. A subset of SpaMEM is publicly available at https://huggingface.co/datasets/mill-ct-liao/SpaMEM.

Chih-Ting Liao, Xi Xiao, Chunlei Meng +6

The University of New South Wales · The University of Alabama at Birmingham · Fudan University +4

Multimodal Large Language ModelsVisual Spatial ReasoningSpatiotemporal ReasoningSpatial Reasoning BenchmarksSpatial ReasoningVisually Grounded Reasoning+1
AskPDF
Apr 22, 2026

Exploring Spatial Intelligence from a Generative Perspective

Spatial intelligence is essential for multimodal large language models, yet current benchmarks largely assess it only from an understanding perspective. We ask whether modern generative or unified multimodal models also possess generative spatial intelligence (GSI), the ability to respect and manipulate 3D spatial constraints during image generation, and whether such capability can be measured or improved. We introduce GSI-Bench, the first benchmark designed to quantify GSI through spatially grounded image editing. It consists of two complementary components: GSI-Real, a high-quality real-world dataset built via a 3D-prior-guided generation and filtering pipeline, and GSI-Syn, a large-scale synthetic benchmark with controllable spatial operations and fully automated labeling. Together with a unified evaluation protocol, GSI-Bench enables scalable, model-agnostic assessment of spatial compliance and editing fidelity. Experiments show that fine-tuning unified multimodal models on GSI-Syn yields substantial gains on both synthetic and real tasks and, strikingly, also improves downstream spatial understanding. This provides the first clear evidence that generative training can tangibly strengthen spatial reasoning, establishing a new pathway for advancing spatial intelligence in multimodal models.

Muzhi Zhu, Shunyao Jiang, Huanyi Zheng +9

Zhejiang University, State Key Laboratory of CAD & CG · Ant Group · Zhejiang University of Technology +1

Spatial ReasoningUnified Multimodal Models3D Spatial ReasoningSpatial Reasoning BenchmarksMultimodal Foundation ModelsImage Editing+2
AskPDF
Apr 17, 2026

Chain-of-Thought Degrades Visual Spatial Reasoning Capabilities of Multimodal LLMs

Multimodal Reasoning Models (MRMs) leveraging Chain-of-Thought (CoT) based thinking have revolutionized mathematical and logical problem-solving. However, we show that this paradigm struggles with generalized spatial intelligence. We perform a comprehensive evaluation of seventeen models across thirteen spatial benchmarks and identify a critical gap: CoT prompting consistently degrades performance in visual spatial reasoning. Furthermore, through a novel No-Image++ ablation, we demonstrate that MRMs and CoT prompted MLMs suffer from severe shortcut learning, and hallucinate visual details from textual priors even when the image is absent. These findings challenge the efficacy of text-only CoT for spatial tasks and underscore the need for vision-centric reasoning paradigms.

Sai Srinivas Kancheti, Aditya Sanjiv Kanade, Vineeth N. Balasubramanian +1

IIT, Hyderabad · Microsoft Research India

Multimodal Model EvaluationVisual Spatial ReasoningShortcut LearningSpatial Reasoning BenchmarksObject Hallucination in VLMsVLM Reasoning+4
AskPDF
Apr 17, 2026

Mind's Eye: A Benchmark of Visual Abstraction, Transformation and Composition for Multimodal LLMs

Multimodal large language models (MLLMs) have achieved impressive progress on vision language benchmarks, yet their capacity for visual cognitive and visuospatial reasoning remains less understood. We introduce "Mind's Eye", a multiple-choice benchmark of eight visuo-cognitive tasks inspired by classic human intelligence tests and organized under a novel "A-R-T" taxonomy: Abstraction, Relation, and Transformation. The tasks probe core processes of fluid intelligence such as pattern induction, analogical relation mapping, and mental transformation. We evaluate a diverse suite of closed-source and open-source MLLMs and compare their performance with human participants. Humans achieve 80% accuracy, while top performing MLLMs remain below 50%. Error analysis reveals failures in: (i) visual attention allocation, (ii) internal perceptual manipulation, and (iii) weak abstraction of underlying visual concepts. Our findings suggest that current MLLMs exhibit limited visuospatial reasoning capabilities, when compared with human participants, highlighting the need for more cognitively grounded evaluation frameworks.

Rohit Sinha, Aditya Kanade, Sai Srinivas Kancheti +2

CSE Dept., IIT Hyderabad Hyderabad, India · Microsoft Research Bengaluru, India

Spatial Reasoning BenchmarksVisual Spatial ReasoningVisual ReasoningMultimodal Large Language ModelsVisually Grounded ReasoningMultimodal Model Evaluation
AskPDF
Apr 14, 2026

ARGOS: Who, Where, and When in Agentic Multi-Camera Person Search

Existing person search methods assume access to complete visual queries or exhaustive tracking, yet real-world witness accounts are vague, partial, and spread across cameras and time. We introduce ARGOS (Agentic Retrieval with Grounded Observational Search), a benchmark and agent framework that recasts multi-camera person search from one-shot retrieval on a complete query into interactive reasoning from partial clues. To our knowledge, ARGOS is the first interactive benchmark to couple witness dialogue with camera-network topology, requiring an agent to plan, question, and eliminate under information asymmetry. An ARGOS agent receives a vague witness statement and must decide what to ask, when to invoke spatial or temporal tools, and how to interpret ambiguous natural-language responses, all within a limited turn budget. To ground reasoning in physical constraints, the agent accesses a Spatio-Temporal Topology Graph (STTG) encoding camera connectivity and empirically validated transition times. The benchmark comprises 2{,}691 tasks across 14 real-world scenarios in three progressive tracks: semantic perception (Who, 989 tasks), spatial reasoning (Where, 550 tasks), and temporal reasoning (When, 1{,}152 tasks). We propose Turn-Weighted Success (TWS) as the primary metric, jointly measuring correctness and turn efficiency. Experiments with four LLM backbones show the benchmark is far from solved: the best agent achieves TWS of 0.383 (Track2) and 0.590 (Track3). Ablations confirm each component is essential: removing domain-specific tools drops Top-1 accuracy by up to 49.6 percentage points, and removing strategic reasoning halves TWS while barely affecting Top-1.

Myungchul Kim, Kwanyong Park, Junmo Kim +1

Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (KAIST), Republic of Korea · University of Seoul, Republic of Korea · Korea Institute of Science and Technology (KIST), Republic of Korea

Agent BenchmarksSpatial Reasoning BenchmarksAgentic ReasoningPerson Re-Identification
AskPDF
Apr 13, 2026

Spatial Atlas: Compute-Grounded Reasoning for Spatial-Aware Research Agent Benchmarks

We describe compute-grounded reasoning (CGR), a design pattern in which code computes selected sub-problems from explicit intermediate representations before a language model answers. Spatial Atlas implements CGR as an Agent2Agent (A2A) server with a spatial question-answering handler and a machine-learning engineering handler. The spatial handler asks a language model to extract a scene graph, and code then fills in missing distances and checks the extracted safety rules. A separate benchmark driver can also run a strict metric bridge. It computes the gap for horizontal-gap questions from segmentation masks and a reconstructed point map, and it passes that gap to the answering model as a fact. The bridge returns a fixed unavailable answer when an evidence check fails, and it never falls back to model-estimated coordinates. The ML-engineering handler generates pipeline code, parses validation scores, and caps the number of repair and refinement passes. Its code execution is off by default. The repository also provides four run modes that can write label-free journals, a shuffled-image control mapping, and journal validators that reject label-bearing fields. We report one private label-free operational run in which four paths each wrote eight prediction rows with zero retries. Labels stayed sealed, and no score was computed, so this run establishes operational integrity only. We report no FieldWorkArena result because the benchmark data were not accessible. We also omit every performance, latency, and resource-use number that lacks a reproducible run artifact.

Arun Sharma

University of Minnesota, Twin Cities

Geospatial QASpatial Reasoning BenchmarksQuestion AnsweringSpatial ReasoningAgent Benchmarks
AskPDF