CoreCognition
Models answer true or false and multiple choice questions on 12 core knowledge concepts from developmental cognitive science, such as object permanence and perspective taking.
The paper evaluates 230 models with 11 prompts and adds a Concept Hacking control test.
In the authors’ words
While Multi-modal Large Language Models (MLLMs) demonstrate impressive abilities over high-level perception and reasoning, their robustness in the wild remains limited, often falling short on tasks that are intuitive and effortless for humans. We examine the hypothesis that these deficiencies stem from the absence of core knowledge–rudimentary cognitive abilities innate to humans from early childhood. To explore the core knowledge representation in MLLMs, we introduce CoreCognition, a large-scale benchmark encompassing 12 core knowledge concepts grounded in developmental cognitive science. We evaluate 230 models with 11 different prompts, leading to a total of 2,530 data points for analysis. Our experiments uncover four key findings, collectively demonstrating core knowledge deficits in MLLMs: they consistently underperform and show reduced, or even absent, scalability on low-level abilities relative to high-level ones. Finally, we propose Concept Hacking, a novel controlled evaluation method that reveals MLLMs fail to progress toward genuine core knowledge understanding, but instead rely on shortcut learning as they scale.
- 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
STEP3-VL-10B leads with 66.7%
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.
- 1
STEP3-VL-10B 66.7%
| # | Model | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | | 66.7% | Jan 2026 | Model card |
Scores over time
All the scores we have, one dot each, so a model tested at several settings appears more than once.
Labs report it only in system cards
We read the headline results of 479 launch posts from 51 labs, and none of them list this benchmark. Some system cards do, below.
One system card reports it
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.
| Date | Document | Score | As the document writes it | Section |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 14 Jan 2026 | | 66.7 | CoreCognition, SeRe (Tables 1 and 3). PaCoRe 71.54 | Capabilities |
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. 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%