VLM Evaluation

Spatial planning maps are central to territorial governance, translating planning objectives, regulations, and spatial strategies into visual forms for decision-making, public communication, and institutional coordination. Their interpretation, however, requires fine-grained visual perception, spatial reasoning, and policy-informed professional judgment, creating major challenges for both human learners and AI systems. With the rapid progress of Vision-Language Models (VLMs), their use in urban planning analysis is gaining attention, yet existing multimodal benchmarks mainly target general visual understanding and overlook the domain-specific cognitive processes of planning practice. To address this gap, we introduce PlanBench-V, the first comprehensive benchmark for evaluating VLMs in spatial planning map interpretation. We first build the Spatial Planning Map Database (SPMD), an expert-annotated dataset of 223 planning maps and 1629 question-answer pairs curated by professional planners, covering diverse geographic regions and cartographic styles. We then propose a theory-informed evaluation framework assessing four progressive capabilities: Perception, Reasoning, Association, and Implementation, corresponding to the cognitive pipeline of planning map interpretation. Extensive experiments across two generations of VLMs show clear progress but persistent limitations. The best 2026 agentic reasoning model, Qwen3.6-Plus, substantially outperforms the best 2025 model, GPT-4o, by 27%. Nevertheless, all models still struggle with implementation-oriented tasks requiring evaluative judgment, policy sensitivity, and constraint-aware decision-making. These findings reveal fundamental limitations of current VLMs in professional planning contexts and highlight the need for domain-adaptive multimodal reasoning frameworks. Code and data are available at https://plangpt.github.io.

Recent advancements in Vision-Language Models (VLMs) have significantly enhanced their ability to interpret complex visual semantics, yet their capacity for chronological reasoning remains under-explored. In this paper, we introduce a novel benchmark specifically designed to evaluate how VLMs perceive and reason about chronological information within and across images. Unlike existing video-based benchmarks that focus on frame sequencing, our work delves into the underlying logic of chronological judgment and the expansion toward multimodal integration. To facilitate this, we construct three specialized datasets: one containing visually similar objects spanning long historical durations, another categorized by diverse event and object types, and a third pairing images with time-sensitive news text for cross-modal alignment. Through extensive experiments, we analyze whether models exhibit performance disparities across categories and, crucially, explore whether they rely on ``incorrect shortcuts'', such as image color rather than genuine chronological features. Our results reveal that while VLMs show promise, they frequently exploit superficial cues like grayscale versus color filters to bypass authentic chronological reasoning. By providing these high-quality datasets and a rigorous evaluation framework, we offer a diagnostic tool to identify current limitations and guide the development of more robust, logically grounded multimodal models. The source code is shown in https://github.com/LuoRenqiang/ChronoVision.

Vision-language models (VLMs) excel on visual question answering and multimodal reasoning benchmarks. Yet their capability on ultra-resolution images - where critical evidence is tiny, subtle, spatially distant, or distributed - remains unclear. Existing evaluations largely report final-answer accuracy, offering limited insight into whether models acquire and integrate the necessary visual evidence. We introduce UltraVR, a diagnostic benchmark for evidence-grounded visual reasoning over ultra-resolution images. UltraVR spans four high-value scenarios: CCTV surveillance, remote sensing (RS), whole-slide image (WSI) pathology, and industrial anomaly detection (AD). These domains pose complementary challenges: fine-grained object grounding in crowded CCTV scenes, long-range spatial comparison in RS, multi-scale evidence navigation in WSI, and subtle irregularity detection in repetitive industrial layouts. Beyond standard QA triples, each instance includes a structured ground-truth chain of thought with step-level questions, intermediate answers, and reasoning labels. These labels decompose reasoning into evidence grounding, local perception, quantification, evidence integration, and decision inference, enabling process-level diagnosis over black-box scoring. Using UltraVR, we evaluate frontier VLMs and show that current models remain far from reliable on ultra-resolution reasoning. Importantly, the structured annotations allow us to localize failures across the visual-to-decision pipeline: errors concentrate in evidence grounding and local perception, while downstream inference often recovers when intermediate visual facts are supplied. These findings demonstrate UltraVR as a diagnostic testbed for measuring not only whether VLMs answer correctly, but where their ultra-resolution reasoning process breaks.

Despite the rapid progress of Vision-Language Models (VLMs), the field lacks benchmarks that rigorously diagnose their true reasoning abilities and chart meaningful progress toward human-like multimodal intelligence. Most existing evaluations focus on piecemeal or disconnected tasks, obscuring critical cognitive weaknesses and providing little insight for targeted improvement. To address this gap, we introduce BloomBench, part of the Almieyar benchmarking series, the first cognitively human-grounded, bilingual (English-Arabic) multimodal benchmark for VLMs. Grounded in Bloom's Taxonomy, BloomBench systematically evaluates six levels of cognition (Remember, Understand, Apply, Analyze, Evaluate, Create) through carefully designed image-question-answer tasks. Built with a semi-automated pipeline and validated through a stratified hybrid quality assurance protocol, it ensures scalability, cultural inclusivity, and linguistic fidelity. Leveraging this framework, we conduct a comprehensive study of state-of-the-art VLMs to diagnose their cognitive profiles. Our analysis reveals a sharp cognitive asymmetry: while state-of-the-art models achieve strong performance ceilings in semantic understanding, they struggle substantially with factual recall and creative synthesis. This demonstrates that current general multimodal proficiency masks deeper limitations in specific cognitive layers. Furthermore, our study highlights a critical performance gap between Arabic and English, exposing limitations in current cross-lingual multimodal reasoning. These findings establish a foundation for developing more cognitively aligned and inclusive VLMs. The benchmark framework and dataset is available at: https://github.com/qcri/Almieyar-Oryx-BloomBench.

Given the inherently multimodal nature of human experience, vision-language models (VLMs) hold substantial promise for modeling human cognition as it grows and develops with experience. Realizing their potential requires tools for comparing VLMs with human cognitive development across tasks, ages, and populations. We present LEVANTE-bench, a benchmark based on tasks and data from the Learning Variability Network (LEVANTE), which distributes open-source tasks and data measuring children's cognition across languages and cultures. In LEVANTE-bench, we systematically assess VLMs on six tasks, comparing their alignment with children aged 5-12 ($N$ = 1547) across three countries. We compare models at multiple scales, assessing their overall accuracy, their task- and item-level alignment with children, and how well they match children's trial-level error distributions. Alignment was heterogeneous across scales: at the level of tasks and items, more capable models aligned better with humans. However, match to human error distributions varied widely across tasks, and for several tasks, smaller models matched younger children's errors better. In addition, even the best-performing VLMs struggled on matrix reasoning and mental rotation tasks. Thus, current VLM architectures align only partially with the cognitive abilities of children.

Vision-language models (VLMs), like human learners, are frequently exposed to new visual concepts, but how they map novel visual references to language after exposure remains largely underexplored, particularly when those references contradict prior knowledge from pre-training. To study this, we present the Novel Visual References Dataset (NVRD): 19,176 images spanning 90 visual concepts across different levels of visual novelty, each with up to 20 increasingly perturbed versions of the original object to probe generalization. Unlike prior work on visual augmentations of familiar concepts, NVRD comprises entirely novel, open-ended stimuli constructed from scratch, mirroring how humans encounter genuinely new concepts. We evaluate 3 open- and 2 closed-source models alongside 2,400 human judgments for direct human-model comparison, and find that (i) models struggle to acquire novel concepts in-context when they contradict prior knowledge, and (ii) while models and humans show correlated sensitivity to visual perturbations, models significantly overgeneralize, extending learned labels to stimuli that humans reject. We contribute NVRD as a corpus and benchmark for research on visual concept learning in both humans and machines.

LLMs and agentic systems are increasingly deployed in social environments, making normative competence critical for safe and appropriate behavior. However, existing approaches either assess normative judgment in text alone or reduce it to choosing among a fixed set of candidate actions. We argue both are insufficient. In practice, agents are never handed a menu of options; they must identify a reasonable action from scratch, grounded in visible facts and supported by inspectable reasons. We introduce NoRA, a visual first-person video benchmark that requires models to generate candidate next actions and justify each through an explicit fact-reason-action support graph. The benchmark comprises 1,420 annotated video clips, including HumanGold-190 and LLMSilver-1230 splits. Each instance is evaluated through action alignment, factual grounding, and support binding, aggregated into a single grounded reasonableness score. We benchmark 12 multimodal systems under direct, deliberate, and structured prompting regimes, finding that current VLMs frequently recover plausible actions and relevant scene facts, but consistently struggle to construct the full reasonable action space and bind selected actions to the correct local support. NoRA makes this gap measurable, shifting the evaluation question from whether a model can pick an action to whether it can justify an appropriate action for the right visible reasons.

Reliable evaluation of human motion understanding is fundamental to advancing embodied AI, robotics, and animation. However, existing benchmarks suffer from coarse semantic granularity, undifferentiated difficulty, limited annotation quality, and pervasive answer ambiguity, leaving them unable to diagnose where current models fail. To bridge this gap, we introduce NextMotionQA, a comprehensive benchmark that leverages vision-language models (VLMs) for semi-automated, expert-verified dataset. NextMotionQA features three complementary tasks: multiple-choice question answering, video captioning, and fine-grained error correction. Each task is systematically structured across three core semantic axes and stratified into three task complexity levels. Our extensive evaluation of twelve representative VLMs uncovers critical capability gaps and weakness that remain invisible under conventional, single-task evaluations. In a complementary direction, recent work has begun using VLMs as judges for text-to-motion evaluation; we ask whether they show the same degradation under harder tasks. We find that VLMs align strongly with expert ratings on coarse criteria (Cohen's κ=0.70) but break down on fine-grained, part-level judgment (κ=0.10), validating the paradigm in its strong regime while clarifying its limits.

Vision-Language Models (VLMs) struggle when applied to medical image-text data, yet the tools available to diagnose this failure remain limited. Existing representation alignment metrics are symmetric, collapsing both modalities into a single score and hiding which modality drives cross-modal degradation. We introduce the Spectral Alignment Score (SAS), an asymmetric metric that projects both modalities onto the principal eigenbasis of an anchor modality and computes eigenvalue-weighted per-eigenmode correlations, resulting in directional scores whose difference quantifies modality information imbalance. We embed SAS within a benchmarking framework evaluating 15 VLMs across natural and medical image-text datasets alongside 6 alignment metrics and bidirectional retrieval. Our experiments show that medical images retain richer structural information than their paired clinical reports, a directional asymmetry invisible to all competing metrics, and that SAS achieves the strongest zero-label correlation with retrieval performance in the medical domain, positioning it as a practical diagnostic tool for clinical deployment. Code is available at this URL: https://github.com/iamalegambetti/medical-vlms-assessment.

Multimodal large language models have made rapid progress in video understanding, yet existing benchmarks largely rely on simple prompts and provide limited evidence about whether models can satisfy explicit output constraints. We introduce VCIFBench, a benchmark for evaluating complex instruction following in video understanding. VCIFBench constructs constraint-rich instructions from both benchmark-adapted and directly video-grounded prompts, covering content, format, style, and structure requirements, and evaluates model outputs with a hybrid verification pipeline. The benchmark contains 306 satisfiable test instructions, a 540-pair DPO preference dataset, and a 30-item conflict diagnostic subset. Experiments on 10 MLLMs show that joint constraint satisfaction remains challenging. We further show that DPO training on VCIFBench data can improve instruction-following performance.

In this report, we present our solution for Track 2 of the CVPR 2026 VidLLMs Challenge. This track evaluates visual relational reasoning in videos, where models must infer relations that are not always explicitly visible. We propose Answer Self-Consistency with Margin-Triggered Question Re-Arbitration (ASC-MQRA), a training-free test-time reasoning framework built on a multimodal reasoning model. The core ASC component performs multiple stochastic video question-answering runs and aggregates their answer choices through answer-level self-consistency. This substantially improves over single-pass inference and forms our final test submission. We further study MQRA, a conditional re-arbitration module for low-margin examples where the first-stage vote distribution indicates uncertainty. Our vote-margin analysis shows that low-margin examples often retain the ground-truth answer among the top candidates, motivating MQRA to narrow the candidate set and re-watch the video only over the retained candidates. On validation, MQRA further improves over ASC, indicating that low-margin vote distributions can provide a useful uncertainty signal. On test, however, MQRA slightly degrades performance relative to ASC, suggesting that re-arbitration is sensitive to the size and category distribution of the triggered subset. Our final test submission therefore uses ASC without re-arbitration, achieving 72.73 average accuracy and 78.34 category-wise macro average accuracy on validation, and 81.16 average accuracy and 80.91 category-wise macro average accuracy on test. This report details our prompting strategy, implementation setup, ablation studies, and diagnostic analyses. The code is available at https://github.com/data-analytics-labo/ASC-MQRA

Given the increased adoption of Vision Language Models (VLMs) in human-interactive settings, it is important that we evaluate how well these models can adapt to real-time preferences for different users. While an increasing number of vision-language benchmarks have recently been introduced, they focus largely on evaluating static capabilities and generally-held preferences learned from extensive training data. This work introduces a new benchmark for evaluating the ability of VLMs to understand dynamic human-preferences, i.e. preferences that are passed in-context at inference time. We provide an automated pipeline for generating this benchmark with variations on image dependence, a dynamic multi-modal human-preference dataset, and evaluations of state-of-the-art models on the novel benchmark.

Previous work has evaluated physics reasoning in foundation models using synthetic or semi-synthetic scenes and visual question-answering tasks. However, these benchmarks emphasize high-level events and lack the visual fidelity required to assess true low-level Newtonian understanding. We introduce NewtPhys, a 4D physically annotated dataset built from multiview images of real-world scenes with physics-grounded simulations. The dataset provides dense, fine-grained annotations across timesteps -- including 3D forces and amodal per-pixel quantities covering physics, tracking, semantics and geometry -- bridging the gap between simplistic synthetic setups and realistic visual complexity. Using NewtPhys, we systematically evaluate 56 VLMs, including 54 open-weight models and 2 closed-source frontier models, and 10 VFMs and reveal limitations in low-level physics reasoning. Beyond benchmarking, our dataset enables future research in physics-grounded vision and the development of next-generation physics-aware evaluations. Code and datasets are available at https://astra-vision.github.io/NewtPhys.

As foundation models scale toward fusing more heterogeneous visual streams, understanding how diverse encoders interact under joint training becomes a prerequisite for principled design. Yet large vision-language models (LVLMs) currently lack the tools to do so, and parameter-efficient encoder configurations remain hard to identify before training. To re-examine encoder roles under joint training, on the 16-benchmark Cambrian-1 suite we retrain and evaluate all 31 non-empty subsets of five common vision encoders under a unified pipeline (~20k GPU-hours total), and report three findings. First, retraining each subset from scratch reveals encoder rankings that differ from those obtained by masking encoders on a fixed checkpoint, including which encoder ranks first overall. Second, we decompose each encoder's contribution into two axes, Capacity, the score an encoder reaches on its own, and Necessity, the drop when it is removed from the full pool. The two axes are not interchangeable. Pairing the two highest-Capacity encoders is suboptimal, while pairing a high-Capacity anchor with an adaptive complement matches the full five-encoder model. Adding further encoders beyond this pair yields only marginal gains. Third, at fixed parameter count, per-encoder pre-projector effective rank explains the residual score variation. The strongest pairs combine an anchor whose rank survives joint training with a complement whose rank expands under it, suggesting that higher-rank, less-collapsed projector inputs correspond to a more favorable optimization regime at the encoder-projector interface. Together, the Capacity-Necessity decomposition and the pre-projector rank analysis, along with comprehensive evaluation through retraining, expose a methodological gap in multi-encoder LVLM design, and offer concrete primitives for closing it.

Medical Vision-Language Models (VLMs) are typically evaluated on English radiology visual question answering benchmarks, leaving their robustness under non-English clinical language largely unexplored. We introduce IndoRad-VQA, an Indonesian adaptation of VQA-RAD, to assess whether medical VLMs retain radiology reasoning ability when questions are asked in Bahasa Indonesia. Radiology question-answer pairs are translated into Indonesian with self-evaluation-based quality control to preserve clinical meaning, terminology consistency, and answer equivalence. We evaluate general-purpose, Southeast Asian multilingual, and medical-specific VLMs under English and Indonesian prompting settings. Beyond accuracy, we quantify the language robustness gap between English and Indonesian inputs. We also conduct an error analysis to identify failure modes of question answering, such as yes/no flips, laterality errors, and output-language mismatches. Our findings show that strong performance on English medical VQA benchmarks does not necessarily translate to robust behavior in Indonesian clinical contexts. We observe a performance gap of 8 to 25 percent between the English and Indonesian settings, depending on the evaluation metric. These results highlight the need for more inclusive multilingual evaluation of medical multimodal foundation models. The dataset is available at https://huggingface.co/datasets/Lab-IS/IndoRad-VQA.

Understanding short online videos involves more than identifying visible objects and actions; video makers often include an underlying message or purpose in the clip. We introduce VidMsg, a benchmark for evaluating implicit message understanding in short, internet-native video clips. VidMsg contains 400 YouTube-derived clips across 9 practical topic areas and 52 fine-grained target messages, covering domains such as career and finance, education, health and well-being, culture, safety, sustainability, and lifestyle. VidMsg is constructed through a message-first pipeline: an LLM first translates target messages into indirect search scenarios, which are used to retrieve candidate clips. Human annotators then retain clips that convey the intended message without being overly explicit. VidMsg is designed primarily for bidirectional message-clip retrieval for scalable applications such as video search and recommendation, where systems must capture holistic video understanding. In addition to retrieval, VidMsg includes a diagnostic multiple-choice QA benchmark, where models select the intended message of a clip from semantically related alternatives. Experiments with contemporary video-language and retrieval models show that strong models often fail on VidMsg, because the task requires pragmatic inference, integration of contextual cues, and discrimination among semantically close messages. We also introduce VidVec-Msg, a baseline method that improves message-oriented retrieval while leaving substantial headroom for future work.

Vision-language models (VLMs) have been explored for visual programming, where they generate code to solve visual tasks. However, most prior work focuses on visual programming for productivity; it remains unclear how well current VLMs perform on education-oriented visual programming and what factors limit their performance. To bridge this gap, we introduce TurtleAI, a benchmark containing 823 tasks curated based on real-world visual programming tasks in the Turtle Graphics domain. Solving these tasks requires models to perceive geometric patterns, reason about spatial relationships, and synthesize Python code that faithfully reproduces geometric patterns. We evaluate 20+ VLMs, including GPT-5, GPT-4o, and Qwen2-VL-72B, and find that they struggle significantly, with most achieving success rates below 30%. To address these limitations, we propose a data generation technique that requires only a small set of seed samples. Fine-tuning Qwen2-VL-72B on the resulting synthetic data yields an improvement of about 20% on real-world tasks. Our failure analysis reveals that GPT-4o struggles with spatial reasoning and precise visual replication, whereas fine-tuning primarily improves the alignment between visual reasoning and code implementation.

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.

Engineering diagrams pose a distinct challenge for vision-language models: unlike natural images or general documents, they encode information through dense spatial layouts, domain-specific symbols, and cross-references between visual callouts and structured parts tables. Despite their centrality to service, repair, and design workflows, there is no public benchmark for measuring VLM capabilities in this domain; existing datasets primarily focus on flowcharts, scientific figures, or business documents. To address this gap, we introduce Enginuity, the first open dataset and benchmark for evaluating VLMs on complex engineering diagrams. We define two tasks over a corpus of U.S. military service and repair manuals: structured parts-table extraction (Task 1) and free-form visual diagram question answering (VQA)(Task 2) for benchmarking. We evaluate four frontier VLMs (GPT-5.2 Chat, Claude Opus 4.7, Gemma 4, Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct) under zero-shot and chain-of-thought prompting. On Task 1, models reach Recall@all of 0.61-0.87 but Token F1pen of only 0.03-0.18, exposing a systematic gap between part identification and description fidelity. Task 2 reveals a consistent factual-reasoning gap across all models. A supporting analysis shows that token-overlap metrics under-report model capability on technical descriptions by 2-6x relative to semantic similarity, motivating LLM-as-judge calibration for domain-specific evaluation. We release the dataset, annotations, evaluation harness, and per-sample model outputs to support a reproducible study of VLM capability on engineering content.

Visual DeepSearch requires multimodal large reasoning model (MLRM) agents to answer complex visual queries by repeatedly inspecting image regions, grounding intermediate reasoning in visual evidence, and connecting fine-grained clues across long reasoning chains. However, existing benchmarks mainly focus on single-step visual understanding or static image-question answering, offering limited evaluation of iterative image inspection, visual-anchor grounding, and multi-hop evidence integration. In this work, we introduce VistaHop, a benchmark for evaluating vision-centric search and multi-hop visual reasoning in Visual DeepSearch. VistaHop contains 300 high-resolution images, 25 visual search scenarios, and 350 multi-hop QA tasks that require models to follow evidence chains from visual anchors or fuse information across multiple image-grounded reasoning paths. We further develop VistaArena, a unified evaluation environment that supports tool-augmented reasoning with text search, image search, image cropping, and evidence-based answer validation. Experiments on seven representative MLRMs show that current models remain far from solving VistaHop: the best model, SenseNova-MARS-32B, achieves only 24.31% Pass@1. These results reveal persistent limitations in visual grounding, evidence revisiting, long-chain reasoning, and multi-anchor information fusion, highlighting the need for stronger benchmarks and training methods for Visual DeepSearch.

Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs) show strong visualization interpretation, yet it is unclear whether their responses reflect genuine reasoning over visual evidence or factual priors learned during training. Current evaluations mix these two sources, obscuring when correct visual interpretation is overridden by memorized facts. We present a framework that isolates visual correctness from factual correctness, revealing validity limitations in existing visualization literacy assessments. Across three experiments with 15 state-of-the-art LVLMs: (1) several models reach human-level performance on standard tests (VLAT), but this may reflect factual recall rather than visual understanding, while randomized-data tests (reVLAT) underestimate literacy when correct visual interpretation is superseded by factual priors. (2) Using our Counterfactual Visualization Literacy Assessment Test (CVLAT) with capability-normalized arbitration metrics, we classify models by the sign of their visual-factual reliance index (VFRI), revealing a visualization-oriented majority and a factual knowledge-oriented minority, though several near-zero cases warrant caution. A human baseline (N=30) on the same counterfactual items confirms that people overwhelmingly follow the chart under conflict, providing a human reference point. (3) Prompt-based intervention can shift prioritization, but its effectiveness is highly model-dependent and direction-asymmetric, and high chart-reading capability does not predict prompt-controllability. Overall, high visualization accuracy is not sufficient evidence of faithful visual reasoning: reliable integration into visual analytics requires evaluating not only visualization literacy but also how models arbitrate between visual evidence and factual priors when the two diverge. Benchmark and code: https://github.com/JaeyoungKim-HCIL/CVLAT

Evaluating vision-language models (VLMs) on medical images requires benchmarks that are clinically grounded, scalable, and controlled for evaluation confounds. Existing public benchmarks are limited in scale, manually annotated, or potentially leaked into VLM pretraining corpora. We present an automated agent-driven pipeline that generates multiple-choice VQA datasets directly from paired private radiology reports and 3D oncology imaging, producing two complementary question types: RADS-style questions deterministically derived from clinician-defined reporting schemas, and radiology report-derived questions generated by an LLM from radiologist findings and verified against the source report. Applied to four in-house cancer cohorts, the pipeline yields an instance-contamination-controlled benchmark without per-question human annotation. Zero-shot evaluation of six VLMs reveals no dominant model and substantial headroom across all cells. A blind ablation reveals that visual reliance is highly dataset-specific: liver Report-derived questions genuinely require the image, while Lung CT is essentially solvable without it - the leading closed model exceeds its sighted accuracy on Lung CT when blinded - indicating that even private clinical data does not guarantee a contamination-controlled read of visual capability. The pipeline is released as an open agent skill for in-house redeployment.

Assessing built-environment interaction, such as wheelchair accessibility, is difficult because real-world mobility is shaped by distributed, context-dependent, and temporary barriers that are hard to capture at scale. To support scalable assessment, this paper examines whether vision-language models (VLMs) can identify accessibility barriers from Google Street View (GSV) imagery. We propose an expert-guided retrieval-augmented framework that combines GSV images, ADA-informed guidance, and expert-derived rubrics to evaluate accessibility dimensions. We collect a campus-scale dataset at the University of Florida, linking 407 unique GSV locations with GPS-derived wheelchair dwell behavior as a mobility-friction signal. Results show that VLM ratings are both negatively correlated and distributionally similar with dwell time, indicating partial but consistent alignment with a behavioral proxy for mobility friction. Visual cue analysis shows that certain environmental objects, such as curb ramps and crosswalks, are associated with higher VLM accessibility scores, while alignment remains limited for subtle surface conditions, transient obstructions, and viewpoint-dependent barriers. Overall, our findings show the potential of expert-guided VLMs for scalable accessibility assessment aligning with sensor-derived indicators of real-world wheelchair navigation.

Vision-language models (VLMs) for autonomous driving have shown promising performance, but their ability to handle region-specific traffic rules remains underexplored, raising uncertainties about their deployment across diverse global settings. We therefore introduce GeoDrive-Bench, a novel benchmark that enables the systematic investigation of VLMs' geo-culturally grounded driving reasoning. We curated 5,053 human-validated multiple-choice QA pairs across six countries covering diverse driving cultures. Specifically, we emphasize four driving tasks: perception, prediction, planning, and region reasoning. Each question requires models to infer the correct driving behavior from visual evidence and local traffic conventions without explicit country labels. Beyond evaluation, we further design a distillation algorithm that injects region-specific traffic-rule knowledge into the internal representations of VLMs, enabling models to better align visual scene understanding with local driving policies. Experiments on nine state-of-the-art VLMs show substantial performance variations across geo-driving cultures for each task, while our proposed baseline models exhibit improved geo-cultural reasoning across regions. These results suggest that current VLMs still lack robust region-aware driving intelligence and highlight GeoDrive-Bench as a diagnostic and training-oriented testbed for deployable autonomous driving foundation 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 \textbf{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.

Video multimodal large language models (MLLMs) have made rapid progress on general and long-form video understanding, yet their ability to preserve brief answer-critical visual evidence remains underexplored. Many practical questions are determined by momentary visual events: localized actions or state transitions that may last only a few frames. Such evidence can be skipped by sparse frame sampling, suppressed by visual-token compression, or diluted by coarse temporal aggregation, causing failures that language-side reasoning cannot reliably recover. We introduce Moment-Video, a benchmark for diagnosing the temporal fidelity of video MLLMs through momentary visual event understanding. Each question is grounded in a localized, visually observable, and sampling-sensitive event, requiring models to notice, count, describe, or reason about transient evidence rather than rely on persistent objects, global scene context, or language priors. Moment-Video contains 1,000 human-verified video-QA pairs across 7 domains and 25 fine-grained subcategories, covering four task types: Temporal Occurrence, Temporal Counting, Action Description, and Temporal Reasoning. We evaluate 33 proprietary and open-source MLLMs on Moment-Video. The best-performing model, Seed-2.0-Pro, achieves only 39.6% overall accuracy, while most open-source models remain below 25%, revealing a substantial gap in momentary visual event understanding. Diagnostic analyses show that denser frame sampling improves some models but does not eliminate the bottleneck, and longer videos introduce stronger temporal-localization challenges. These findings suggest that current video MLLMs still lack temporally faithful representations for capturing, preserving, and using brief but decisive visual evidence.

Vision-Language-Action (VLA) models are increasingly used as generalist robot policies, yet their evaluation still relies largely on static benchmarks that randomly sample task scenes. In high-dimensional embodied spaces, failures are sparse and clustered, so static benchmarking can underestimate robustness risks. We reframe VLA evaluation as an active failure-discovery problem and propose a failure-aware test-generation approach that combines diversity-driven exploration with surrogate models learned from observed executions. The method steers testing toward high-risk yet diverse scene regions. Across four state-of-the-art VLA models, it uncovers substantially more failures (up to +29.7 % over selected baselines) while revealing more diverse failure modes. This mean that, for instance, in the case of GR00T-N1.6, success rate dropped from 64.4% to 34.7%. More broadly, our findings call for a shift in VLA evaluation: from passive measurement on fixed task suites to adaptive, failure-seeking test generation that exposes the structure of model weaknesses before deployment.

Can vision-language models predict what a 180° rotation would reveal from the original image alone? We study this ability through Rotated-Outcome Prediction: given an original image, a model must answer what would be seen or read after a 180° in-plane rotation, without directly observing the rotated target. To isolate this gap, we introduce RotOutBench, a paired diagnostic benchmark spanning open visual cases and controlled text-image rotations. A sharp pattern emerges: many VLMs can recognize the relevant content when directly given either the original or rotated image, yet fail to infer the rotated result from the original image alone. On controlled text-image rotations, predicted-rotation accuracy collapses to near zero even for models with high direct-reading accuracy. A model-level case study further shows that the prediction state can approach a rotated-image reading state, while the final readout still shifts toward the original string. Current VLMs can recognize a transformed visual state when it is shown, but often fail to predict that state from the original view.

Understanding subtle driver actions is essential for building reliable driver monitoring systems. Existing visionlanguage models (VLMs) are trained on general datasets and struggle to recognize fine distinctions in driver behaviors. This paper addresses this limitation by creating a detailed natural language version of the Drive&Act dataset. We evaluate three VLMs on our new benchmark using LLM-based scoring methods. Their performance on the new benchmark shows that they cannot reliably generate accurate fine-grained driver activity descriptions. Based on the labeled Drive&Act dataset we create a new Drive&Act description dataset containing finegrained descriptions to train VLMs on driver activity understanding. Cross dataset evaluation on the Driver Monitoring Dataset (DMD) shows that the VLM fine-tuned on our new Drive&Act description dataset generalizes well to actions in the DMD dataset. The VLM fine-tuned on our Drive&Act description dataset achieves an ACCR score of 76 outperforming the zero-shot VLM baseline with an ACCR score of 66. These findings demonstrate that adapting VLMs with richly described driver actions can significantly improve their ability to interpret driver behavior while also highlighting the need for more diverse datasets to support broader generalization in future applications. Our Drive&Act description dataset and code will be publicly available on GitHub.

Visual emotion understanding requires models not only to recognize emotional states, but also to why they arise and perform higher-level cognitive reasoning. However, existing benchmarks mainly focus on emotion recognition, offering limited support for grounded understanding and response-oriented analysis. To address this gap, we introduce \textbf{InsightVQA}, a large-scale dataset for hierarchical visual question answering on emotion understanding and cognitive reasoning. Building from 351K images collected from six public sources, we apply a rigorous multi-stage filtering pipeline to curate 138K high-confidence images. Each image is annotated at three hierarchical levels: perception QA for emotion and valence recognition, grounded understanding QA constructed from visual trigger extraction through constraint-guided generation, and cognition QA centered on response intent prediction and sequential insight reasoning. In total, InsightVQA contains 725K QA pairs. We further present \textbf{InsightVQA-Bench}, a high-quality evaluation benchmark comprising 30K samples for fine-grained evaluation. To support evaluation, we introduce \textbf{InsightNet}, an emotion-tuned baseline for MLLMs. Results demonstrate that InsightVQA poses significant challenges for grounded emotion understanding and reasoning.