Benchmark Almanac

All-Angles Bench

Seed2.0 Pro 72.1% leads since Feb 2026 Fading

Models answer over 2,100 multi-view questions about 90 real scenes. Six tasks cover counting, attributes, relative distance and direction, object manipulation and camera pose.

The paper tested 27 models against human evaluators and found a large gap, mostly on cross-view correspondence and camera pose.

In the authors’ words

Multi-view understanding, the ability to reconcile visual information across diverse viewpoints for effective navigation, manipulation, and 3D scene comprehension, is a fundamental challenge in Multi-Modal Large Language Models (MLLMs) to be used as embodied agents. While recent MLLMs have shown impressive advances in high-level reasoning and planning, they frequently fall short when confronted with multi-view geometric consistency and cross-view correspondence. To comprehensively evaluate the challenges of MLLMs in multi-view scene reasoning, we propose All-Angles Bench, a benchmark of over 2,100 human carefully annotated multi-view question-answer pairs across 90 diverse real-world scenes. Our six tasks (counting, attribute identification, relative distance, relative direction, object manipulation, and camera pose estimation) specifically test model's geometric correspondence and the capacity to align information consistently across views. Our extensive experiments, benchmark on 27 representative MLLMs including Gemini-2.0-Flash, Claude-3.7-Sonnet, and GPT-4o against human evaluators reveals a substantial performance gap, indicating that current MLLMs remain far from human-level proficiency. Through in-depth analysis, we show that MLLMs are particularly underperforming under two aspects: (1) cross-view correspondence for partially occluded views and (2) establishing the coarse camera poses. These findings highlight the necessity of domain-specific refinements or modules that embed stronger multi-view awareness. We believe that our All-Angles Bench offers valuable insights and contribute to bridging the gap between MLLMs and human-level multi-view understanding. The project and benchmark are publicly available at https://danielchyeh.github.io/All-Angles-Bench/.

Abstract of Seeing from Another Perspective: Evaluating Multi-View Understanding in MLLMs (arXiv:2504.15280, CC0)
Made by Yeh et al. (UC Berkeley, NYU and others) Released Apr 2025 Spatial reasoning and counting All tasks public Last in a launch post Jan 2026 , dropped before it saturated Last model added Feb 2026
Level
Everyday Most adults, without training
Scored
Checked automatically A program checks the result against an answer key, unit tests or the expected final state.
Answers
Multiple choice
6
Models scored in lab cards
3
Launch posts list it, from 3 labs
6
System cards report it, from 3 labs

Seed2.0 Pro leads with 72.1% among models released by Feb 2026

Best score per model as labs report them in their own cards. Labs pick their own settings, so these compare less cleanly than independent runs.

The newest model with a score here came out in Feb 2026, and nobody has reported a newer one. Among the 20 highest-ranked models on the capability index, these have no score yet:

  1. 1 Seed2.0 Pro 72.1%
  2. 2 Seed1.5-VL 58.6%
  3. 3 STEP3-VL-10B 57.2%
  4. 4 GLM-4.5V 56.9%
  5. 5 GLM-4.6V 56.2%
  6. 6 GLM-4.1V-9B-Thinking 52.7%
#ModelScoreSettingDateSource
1 Seed2.0 Pro 72.1% Feb 2026 Model card
2 Seed1.5-VL 58.6% May 2025 Model card
3 STEP3-VL-10B 57.2% Jan 2026 Model card
4 GLM-4.5V 56.9% Aug 2025 Model card
5 GLM-4.6V 56.2% Jan 2026 Model card
6 GLM-4.1V-9B-Thinking 52.7% Jul 2025 Model card

2 models have held number one since its release in Apr 2025

Lab claims count from the day the card came out, independent runs from the model’s release.

ByteDance Seed
Lab claims Not tested since Feb 2026
Seed2.0 Pro 72.1%

Scores over time

All the scores we have, one dot each, so a model tested at several settings appears more than once.

Reported by the lab in its model card Best so far
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2025 2026 Near the ceiling (85%) Seed2.0 Pro Seed1.5-VL 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2025 2026 Near the ceiling (85%) Seed2.0 Pro Seed1.5-VL

Labs headline it less often now, last in Jan 2026

Launch posts from every lab that has listed it, one tick per post. Tall colored ticks include it, and short gray ones leave it out.

ByteDance Seed
Z.ai
StepFun
DateLaunch postScoreAs the post writes it
13 Jan 2026 STEP3-VL-10B 57.2 All-Angles-Bench
11 Aug 2025 GLM-4.5V 56.9 All-Angles Bench
12 May 2025 Seed1.5-VL 58.6 All-Angles Bench

6 system cards report it, from 3 labs

Besides launch posts, we read the system cards, model cards and technical reports labs publish with a release. They report far more, including safety and frontier-risk tests.

DateDocumentScoreAs the document writes itSection
14 Feb 2026 Seed2.0 Pro model card 72.1 All-Angles (Table 8) Capabilities
14 Jan 2026 STEP3-VL-10B technical report 57.2 All-Angles-Bench, SeRe (Tables 1 and 3). PaCoRe 64.71 Capabilities
1 Jan 2026 GLM-4.6V technical report 56.2 All-Angles Bench, GLM-4.6V thinking (Table 2) Capabilities
13 Aug 2025 GLM-4.5V technical report 56.9 All-Angles Bench, GLM-4.5V thinking (Table 2) Capabilities
1 Jul 2025 GLM-4.1V-9B-Thinking technical report 52.7 All-Angles Bench, GLM-4.1V-9B-Thinking thinking (Table 2) Capabilities
11 May 2025 Seed1.5-VL technical report 58.6 All-Angles Bench, thinking (Table 6). Non-thinking 59.0 Capabilities

More in Vision

All 234 in Vision
  • MMMU In use 11.5K college-level multimodal questions across 30 subjects. Multiple-choice and open accuracy. GPT-5.1 85.4%
  • MMMU-Pro In use Harder MMMU: college-level multimodal questions with more options and vision-only inputs to remove text shortcuts. Kimi K3.1 Pro 84.1%
  • CharXiv In use Chart understanding on real arXiv figures. Reasoning questions require synthesizing information from complex charts. Claude Fable 5 93.5%
  • MATH-Vision (MathVision) In use 3,040 competition math problems with visual context. Answer accuracy. Qwen 3.8 Max 97.7%
  • ChartQA In use Models answer human-written and generated questions about chart images that need visual and arithmetic reasoning. Scored by relaxed accuracy with a 5 percent numeric tolerance. Command A Vision 90.9%
  • DocVQA In use Models answer 50,000 questions about 12,000 scanned document images by reading their text and layout. Scoring is ANLS, a string similarity to reference answers. Seed1.5-VL 96.9%