Mantis-Eval
Models answer questions that need reasoning across several interleaved images. Scored by accuracy.
Released with the Mantis model paper as its multi-image test set.
In the authors’ words
Large multimodal models (LMMs) have shown great results in single-image vision language tasks. However, their abilities to solve multi-image visual language tasks is yet to be improved. The existing LMMs like OpenFlamingo, Emu2, and Idefics gain their multi-image ability through pre-training on hundreds of millions of noisy interleaved image-text data from the web, which is neither efficient nor effective. In this paper, we aim to build strong multi-image LMMs via instruction tuning with academic-level resources. Therefore, we meticulously construct Mantis-Instruct containing 721K multi-image instruction data to train a family of Mantis models. The instruction tuning empowers Mantis with different multi-image skills like co-reference, comparison, reasoning, and temporal understanding. We evaluate Mantis on 8 multi-image benchmarks and 6 single-image benchmarks. Mantis-Idefics2 can achieve SoTA results on all the multi-image benchmarks and beat the strongest multi-image baseline, Idefics2-8B by an average of 13 absolute points. Notably, Idefics2-8B was pre-trained on 140M interleaved multi-image data, which is 200x larger than Mantis-Instruct. We observe that Mantis performs equivalently well on the held-in and held-out benchmarks, which shows its generalization ability. We further evaluate Mantis on single-image benchmarks and demonstrate that Mantis also maintains a strong single-image performance on par with CogVLM and Emu2. Our results show that multi-image abilities are not necessarily gained through massive pre-training, instead, they can be gained by low-cost instruction tuning. The training and evaluation of Mantis has paved the road for future work to improve LMMs' multi-image abilities.
- 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
LongCat-Flash-Omni leads with 84.8%
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
LongCat-Flash-Omni 84.8%
- 2
InternVL3.5-241B-A28B 77%
| # | Model | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | | 84.8% | Oct 2025 | Model card | |
| 2 | | 77% | Aug 2025 | Model card |
2 models have held number one since its release in May 2024
Lab claims count from the day the card came out, independent runs from the model’s release.
Scores over time
All the scores we have, one dot each, so a model tested at several settings appears more than once.
No launch post has listed it since Oct 2025
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 31 Oct 2025 | 84.8 | Mantis |
2 system cards report it, from 2 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 31 Oct 2025 | | 84.8 | Mantis (Table 5) | Capabilities |
| 25 Aug 2025 | | 77 | Mantis Eval (Table 5) | 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%