Image to Text Safety
Only in system cards
An automated content safety evaluation measures policy violations when prompts combine images and text.
In-house Google DeepMind evaluation. Model cards report only the change in percentage points against an earlier Gemini model.
Made by Google DeepMind Released Apr 2025 Refusing harmful requests Tasks kept private Last in a system card Oct 2026
Last model added Oct 2026
- Level
- Everyday Most adults, without training
- Scored
- Graded by a model A language model scores each response, usually against a rubric.
- Answers
- Open-ended Free-form text, documents, designs or media judged as a whole.
15
System cards report it, from 1 lab
No scores here yet
No lab, leaderboard or Epoch AI run has reported a score for Image to Text Safety yet.
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.
15 system cards report it, from 1 lab
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 13 Oct 2026 |  Gemini 4 Argon model card | Image to Text Safety (lower is better): -9.29pp vs Gemini 3.1 Pro, no absolute rate (safety table, p.9) | Safety | |
| 2 Sep 2026 | Gemini 3.8 Flash model card | Image to Text Safety (lower is better): 0.0pp vs Gemini 3.7 Flash, no absolute rate (safety table, p.7) | Safety | |
| 13 Aug 2026 | Gemini 3.7 Flash model card | Image to Text Safety (lower is better): no change vs Gemini 3.6 Flash, no absolute rate (safety table, p.7) | Safety | |
| 21 Jul 2026 | Gemini 3.6 Flash model card | Image to Text Safety (lower is better): 0% vs Gemini 3.5 Flash, printed as percentage point change, no absolute rate (safety table, p.5) | Safety | |
| 21 Jul 2026 | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite model card | Image to Text Safety (lower is better): 0% vs Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite, printed as percentage point change, no absolute rate (safety table, p.5) | Safety | |
| 19 May 2026 | Gemini 3.5 Flash model card | Image to Text Safety (lower is better): 0% vs Gemini 3 Flash, no absolute rate (safety table, p.6) | Safety | |
| 3 Mar 2026 | Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite model card | Image to Text Safety (lower is better): -21.7% vs Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite, no absolute rate (safety table, p.6) | Safety | |
| 19 Feb 2026 | Gemini 3.1 Pro model card | Image to Text Safety (lower is better): -0.33% vs Gemini 3.0 Pro, no absolute rate (safety table, p.6) | Safety | |
| 26 Sep 2025 | Gemini 2.5 Flash model card | Image to Text Safety: +4.8% (non egregious) vs Gemini 2.0 Flash, Thinking, +6.0% Non-thinking, change only, no absolute rate (safety table, p.9) | Safety | |
| 7 Jul 2025 | Gemini 2.5 Pro technical report | Image-to-text Policy Violations: ↑1.8% (no egregious losses) vs Gemini 1.5 Pro 002, relative change only, no absolute rate (Table 7) | Safety | |
| 7 Jul 2025 | Gemini 2.5 Flash technical report | Image-to-text Policy Violations: ↑6.4% (no egregious losses) vs Gemini 1.5 Flash 002, relative change only, no absolute rate (Table 7) | Safety | |
| 29 Apr 2025 | Gemini 2.5 Flash model card | Image to Text Safety: +9.60% vs Gemini 2.0 Flash, change only, no absolute rate (safety table, p.7) | Safety | |
| 28 Apr 2025 | Gemini 2.5 Pro model card | Image to Text Safety: -4.2% vs Gemini 1.5 Pro 002, change only, no absolute rate (safety table, p.6) | Safety | |
| 15 Apr 2025 | Gemini 2.0 Flash model card | Image to Text Safety: +1.50% vs Gemini 1.5 Pro 002, change only, no absolute rate (safety table, p.5) | Safety | |
| 10 Apr 2025 | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite model card | Image to Text Safety: +2.30% vs Gemini 1.5 Pro 002, change only, no absolute rate (safety table, p.5) | Safety |
More in Safety and alignment
- FORTRESS In use Paired adversarial and benign national-security misuse prompts. Rubric-graded risk score on adversarial and over-refusal score on benign prompts. Claude Opus 5.5 5.78%
- StrongREJECT In use Forbidden-prompt jailbreak benchmark with a rubric grader that scores how useful a non-refusal actually is.
Inkling 98.6% - AgentDojo In use Agents do tool-use tasks while tools and data carry prompt injections. Attack success rate counts hijacked runs. Grok 4 Fast 0%
- MASK In use Measures whether a model contradicts its own elicited beliefs under pressure to lie. Honesty separated from accuracy.
Muse Spark Open 98.1% - Gray Swan IPI Arena benchmark In use Indirect prompt-injection attacks from public red-teaming competitions replayed on tool, coding and browser agents. Attack success rate at k attempts. GPT-6 Astra 8.50%
- Agentic misalignment suite (Anthropic) In use Agents in simulated company settings face threats or goal conflicts that invite blackmail, leaking or sabotage. Score is the misaligned action rate. Claude Sonnet 4.5 0%