CiteVQA
Multimodal models answer questions about long PDFs and must cite the page region that supports each answer with a bounding box. The set has 1,897 questions over 711 documents in seven domains and two languages, averaging 40.6 pages per document. Strict Attributed Accuracy counts an answer only when both the answer and the cited region are correct.
An automated masking pipeline finds the evidence regions and experts then review them. The paper audits 20 MLLMs. 47 Hugging Face upvotes and about 67 GitHub stars.
- Released
- May 2026
- Kind
- Documents, charts and text in images
- Level
- University
- Scored
- Checked automatically
- Answers
- Short answer
- Tasks
- All public
- Strongest model tested
- GPT-5.4 #27 on the capability index
- Last model added
- April 2026
- Scores refreshed
- November 12th, 2026
In the authors’ words
Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) have significantly advanced document understanding, yet current Doc-VQA evaluations score only the final answer and leave the supporting evidence unchecked. This answer-only approach masks a critical failure mode: a model can land on the correct answer while grounding it in the wrong passage—a critical risk in high-stakes domains like law, finance, and medicine, where every conclusion must be traceable to a specific source region. To address this, we introduce CiteVQA, a benchmark that requires models to return element-level bounding-box citations alongside each answer, evaluating both jointly. CiteVQA comprises 1,897 questions across 711 PDFs spanning seven domains and two languages, averaging 40.6 pages per document. To ensure fidelity and scalability, the ground-truth citations are generated by an automated pipeline—which identifies crucial evidence via masking ablation and enforces multi-stage quality control. At the core of our evaluation is Strict Attributed Accuracy (SAA), which credits a prediction only when the answer and the cited region are both correct. Auditing 20 MLLMs reveals a pervasive Attribution Hallucination: models frequently produce the right answer while citing the wrong region. The strongest system (Gemini-3.1-Pro-Preview) achieves an SAA of only 76.0, and the strongest open-source MLLM reaches just 22.5. Ultimately, towards trustworthy document intelligence, CiteVQA exposes a reliability gap that answer-only evaluations overlook, providing the instrumentation needed to close it. Our repository is available at https://github.com/opendatalab/CiteVQA.
Gemini 3.1 Pro leads with 76% among models released by April 2026
Best score per entry from the benchmark's own leaderboard, read on November 12th, 2026. Where a model ran with several settings or harnesses, we keep its best. Names in gray aren't in our model list: fine-tunes, agent systems, products and older models. They don't count toward leaders.
The newest model with a score here came out in April 2026, and nobody has tested a newer one. Among the 20 highest-ranked models on the capability index, these have no score yet:
- Claude Fable 5.2
-
Gemini 4 Carbon
- GPT-6 Astra
- Claude Opus 5.5
- and 16 more
- 76.0
Gemini 3.1 Pro
- 65.4
Gemini 3 Flash
- 59.0 GPT-5.4
- 47.0 Gemini-2.5-Pro (snapshot unspecified)
- 44.1
Seed2.0 Pro
- 33.7 GPT-5.2
- 22.5
Qwen3-VL-235B-A22B
- 20.2
Gemma 4 31B IT
- 19.1 Kimi K2.5
- 18.3
Qwen3.5 397B-A17B
- 17.5
Qwen 3.6 Plus
- 17.3 Qwen3-VL-32B
- 17.3
Qwen3.5-27B
- 14.8
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- 12.8 GLM-5V-Turbo
- 11.1
Qwen3.5-9B
- 10.7
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B
- 8.20 Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B
- 7.50 Qwen3-VL-8B
- 6.20
Gemma 4 26B A4B
- 1
Gemini 3.1 Pro 76%
- 2
Gemini 3 Flash 65.4%
- 3 GPT-5.4 59%
- 4 Gemini-2.5-Pro (snapshot unspecified) 47%
- 5
Seed2.0 Pro 44.1%
- 6 GPT-5.2 33.7%
- 7
Qwen3-VL-235B-A22B 22.5%
- 8
Gemma 4 31B IT 20.2%
- 9 Kimi K2.5 19.1%
- 10
Qwen3.5 397B-A17B 18.3%
- 11
Qwen 3.6 Plus 17.5%
- 12 Qwen3-VL-32B 17.3%
- 13
Qwen3.5-27B 17.3%
- 14
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B 14.8%
- 15 GLM-5V-Turbo 12.8%
- 16
Qwen3.5-9B 11.1%
- 17
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B 10.7%
- 18 Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B 8.20%
- 19 Qwen3-VL-8B 7.50%
- 20
Gemma 4 26B A4B 6.20%
Source: Official CiteVQA leaderboard
| # | Entry | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | | 76% | Feb 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 2 | | 65.4% | Dec 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 3 | GPT-5.4 | 59% | Mar 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 4 | Gemini-2.5-Pro (snapshot unspecified) | 47% | Official leaderboard | ||
| 5 | | 44.1% | Feb 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 6 | GPT-5.2 | 33.7% | Dec 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 7 | | 22.5% | Sep 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 8 | | 20.2% | Apr 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 9 | Kimi K2.5 | 19.1% | Jan 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 10 | | 18.3% | Feb 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 11 | | 17.5% | Mar 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 12 | Qwen3-VL-32B | 17.3% | Official leaderboard | ||
| 13 | | 17.3% | Feb 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 14 | | 14.8% | Feb 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 15 | GLM-5V-Turbo | 12.8% | Apr 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 16 | | 11.1% | Feb 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 17 | | 10.7% | Feb 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 18 | Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B | 8.20% | Official leaderboard | ||
| 19 | Qwen3-VL-8B | 7.50% | Official leaderboard | ||
| 20 | | 6.20% | Apr 2026 | Official leaderboard |
Number one over time
Lab claims count from the day the card came out, independent runs from the model’s release.
Source: Official CiteVQA leaderboard
Scores over time
All the scores we have, one dot each, so a model tested at several settings appears more than once.
Source: Official CiteVQA leaderboard
No lab model card reports it yet
We read the headline results of 522 launch posts from 52 labs, and none of them list this benchmark.
More 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. GPT-5.6 Sol 84.6%
- 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%
- MMStar In use Models answer 1,500 human-curated image questions that cannot be solved without the image, across 6 core capabilities. Scored by accuracy.
Qwen 3.8 Max 85.9%
- 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%