GenEval
Text-to-image models draw prompts about object count, color, position and co-occurrence, and an object detector checks each image. Scored by the share of correct images.
Image generation has no own subcategory in the taxonomy, so it sits under generation in audio-video.
In the authors’ words
Recent breakthroughs in diffusion models, multimodal pretraining, and efficient finetuning have led to an explosion of text-to-image generative models. Given human evaluation is expensive and difficult to scale, automated methods are critical for evaluating the increasingly large number of new models. However, most current automated evaluation metrics like FID or CLIPScore only offer a holistic measure of image quality or image-text alignment, and are unsuited for fine-grained or instance-level analysis. In this paper, we introduce GenEval, an object-focused framework to evaluate compositional image properties such as object co-occurrence, position, count, and color. We show that current object detection models can be leveraged to evaluate text-to-image models on a variety of generation tasks with strong human agreement, and that other discriminative vision models can be linked to this pipeline to further verify properties like object color. We then evaluate several open-source text-to-image models and analyze their relative generative capabilities on our benchmark. We find that recent models demonstrate significant improvement on these tasks, though they are still lacking in complex capabilities such as spatial relations and attribute binding. Finally, we demonstrate how GenEval might be used to help discover existing failure modes, in order to inform development of the next generation of text-to-image models. Our code to run the GenEval framework is publicly available at https://github.com/djghosh13/geneval.
- 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
- Open-ended Free-form text, documents, designs or media judged as a whole.
ERNIE 5.0 leads with 90.1% among models released by Jan 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 Jan 2026, and nobody has reported a newer one. Among the 20 highest-ranked models on the capability index, these have no score yet:
- GPT-6 Astra
- Claude Opus 5.5
- GPT-6.1 Terra
- GPT-6.1 Sol
- and 16 more
- 1
ERNIE 5.0 90.1%
- 2
BAGEL-7B-MoT 88%
- 3
Janus-Pro-7B 80%
| # | Model | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | | 90.1% | Feb 2026 | Model card | |
| 2 | | 88% | May 2025 | Model card | |
| 3 | | 80% | Jan 2025 | Model card |
3 models have held number one since its release in Oct 2023
Lab claims count from the day the card came out, independent runs from the model’s release.
The best score passed 85% in May 2025
All the scores we have, one dot each, so a model tested at several settings appears more than once.
Labs headline it less often now, last in Feb 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.
| Date | Launch post | Score | As the post writes it |
|---|---|---|---|
| 6 Feb 2026 | 90.1 | GenEval | |
| 20 May 2025 | 0.88 | GenEval Overall | |
| 27 Jan 2025 | 80 | GenEval Overall 0.80 |
3 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.
| Date | Document | Score | As the document writes it | Section |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4 Feb 2026 | | 90.1 | GenEval (Table 5) | Capabilities |
| 20 May 2025 | | 88 | GenEval Overall 0.88, with LLM rewriter (Table 5). Without rewriter 0.82 | Capabilities |
| 27 Jan 2025 | | 80 | GenEval Overall 0.80 (Table 4). Single Obj. 0.99, Two Obj. 0.89, Counting 0.59, Colors 0.90, Position 0.79, Color Attri. 0.66 | 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%