OmniDocBench v1.5
Models parse 1,355 PDF pages into text, tables and formulas. The Overall score averages text accuracy from edit distance, table TEDS and formula CDM.
Adds 374 pages to v1.0, raises newspaper and note scans to 200 DPI, and drops the Chinese and English split. Higher Overall is better, unlike the v1.0 edit distance.
In the authors’ words
Document content extraction is a critical task in computer vision, underpinning the data needs of large language models (LLMs) and retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) systems. Despite recent progress, current document parsing methods have not been fairly and comprehensively evaluated due to the narrow coverage of document types and the simplified, unrealistic evaluation procedures in existing benchmarks. To address these gaps, we introduce OmniDocBench, a novel benchmark featuring high-quality annotations across nine document sources, including academic papers, textbooks, and more challenging cases such as handwritten notes and densely typeset newspapers. OmniDocBench supports flexible, multi-level evaluations–ranging from an end-to-end assessment to the task-specific and attribute–based analysis using 19 layout categories and 15 attribute labels. We conduct a thorough evaluation of both pipeline-based methods and end-to-end vision-language models, revealing their strengths and weaknesses across different document types. OmniDocBench sets a new standard for the fair, diverse, and fine-grained evaluation in document parsing. Dataset and code are available at https://github.com/opendatalab/OmniDocBench.
- 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.
GLM-OCR leads with 94.6
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 GLM-OCR 94.6
- 2
Keye-VL-2.0-30B-A3B 84.7
- 3
EXAONE 4.5 33B 81.2
- 4
Muse Glimmer 75.8
- 5
Nemotron 3.5 Bolt E4B 0.42
- 6
DiffusionGemma 26B A4B 0.32
- 7 GPT-5.4 Nano 0.24
- 8
Gemma 4 26B A4B 0.15
- 9
Gemma 4 31B IT 0.13
- 10
Gemini 3 Flash 0.12
- 11
Gemini 3 Pro 0.12
- 12
Seed1.8 0.11
- 13
Seed2.0 Pro 0.10
| # | Model | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | GLM-OCR | 94.6 | Mar 2026 | Model card | |
| 2 | | 84.7 | Jun 2026 | Model card | |
| 3 | | 81.2 | Apr 2026 | Model card | |
| 4 | | 75.8 | Oct 2026 | Model card | |
| 5 | | 0.42 | Oct 2026 | Model card | |
| 6 | | 0.32 | Jun 2026 | Model card | |
| 7 | GPT-5.4 Nano | 0.24 | Mar 2026 | Model card | |
| 8 | | 0.15 | Apr 2026 | Model card | |
| 9 | | 0.13 | Apr 2026 | Model card | |
| 10 | | 0.12 | Dec 2025 | Model card | |
| 11 | | 0.12 | Nov 2025 | Model card | |
| 12 | | 0.11 | Dec 2025 | Model card | |
| 13 | | 0.10 | Feb 2026 | Model card |
The benchmark's own leaderboard has 40 entries, 10 of them models we track. We plot every source in the charts below.
5 models have held number one since its release in Sep 2025
Lab claims count from the day the card came out, independent runs from the model’s release. We draw one row each for the benchmark’s own leaderboard and what labs claim in their cards.
Scores over time
All the scores we have, one dot each, so a model tested at several settings appears more than once.
3 labs put it in a launch post in the last six months
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 14 Aug 2026 | 91.1 | Document intelligence OmniDocBench 1.5 | |
| 10 Aug 2026 | 75.8 | OmniDocBench v1.5 | |
| 3 Aug 2026 | 92.1 | OmniDocBench 1.5 | |
| 10 Jun 2026 | 0.319 | OmniDocBench 1.5 (average edit distance, lower is better) | |
| 1 Jun 2026 | 91.4 | OmniDocBench1.5 | |
| 25 May 2026 | 84.7 | OmniDocBench1.5 | |
| 15 Apr 2026 | 89.9 | OmniDocBench1.5 | |
| 9 Apr 2026 | 81.2 | OmniDocBench v1.5 | |
| 2 Apr 2026 | 0.149 | OmniDocBench 1.5 (average edit distance, lower is better) | |
| 2 Apr 2026 | 91.2 | OmniDocBench1.5 | |
| 2 Apr 2026 | 0.131 | OmniDocBench 1.5 (average edit distance, lower is better) | |
| 17 Mar 2026 | GPT-5.4 Nano | 0.242 | OmniDocBench 1.5 (no tools), lower is better |
| 24 Feb 2026 | 89.8 | OmniDocBench1.5 | |
| 16 Feb 2026 | 90.8 | OmniDocBench1.5 | |
| 14 Feb 2026 | 0.099 | OmniDocBench 1.5 (normalized edit distance, lower is better) | |
| 30 Jan 2026 | GLM-OCR | 94.6 | OmniDocBench v1.5 |
| 27 Jan 2026 | Kimi K2.5 | 88.8 | OmniDocBench 1.5 |
| 18 Dec 2025 | 0.106 | OmniDocBench 1.5 (normalized edit distance, lower is better) | |
| 17 Dec 2025 | 0.121 | OmniDocBench 1.5 (Overall Edit Distance, lower is better) | |
| 18 Nov 2025 | 0.115 | OmniDocBench 1.5 (Overall Edit Distance, lower is better) |
10 system cards report it, from 8 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 23 Oct 2026 | | 0.42 | OmniDocBench 1.5 edit distance, lower is better, reasoning, 0.47 non-reasoning (Table 8) | Capabilities |
| 19 Oct 2026 | | 75.8 | OmniDocBench v1.5, high (Tables 2 and 5) | Capabilities |
| 24 Jul 2026 | | 0.131 | OmniDocBench 1.5, edit distance (lower is better), thinking, max resolution (Table 6) | Capabilities |
| 24 Jul 2026 | | 0.149 | OmniDocBench 1.5, edit distance (lower is better), thinking, max resolution (Table 6) | Capabilities |
| 9 Jun 2026 | | 84.7 | OmniDocBench1.5 overall (Figure 5, printed value) | Capabilities |
| 9 Apr 2026 | | 81.2 | OmniDocBench v1.5 (Table 2, Reasoning mode) | Capabilities |
| 21 Mar 2026 | | 0.106 | OmniDocBench 1.5, normalized edit distance, lower is better (Table 2) | Capabilities |
| 11 Mar 2026 | GLM-OCR technical report | 94.6 | OmniDocBench v1.5 Overall (Tables 3 and 4). Text Edit 0.040, Formula CDM 93.90, Table TEDS 93.96, TEDS-S 96.39, Reading Order Edit 0.044 | Capabilities |
| 14 Feb 2026 | | 0.099 | OmniDocBench 1.5, normalized edit distance, lower is better (Table 8) | Capabilities |
| 30 Jan 2026 | Kimi K2.5 technical report | 88.8 | OmniDocBench 1.5, (1 minus normalized edit distance) x 100 (Table 4) | Capabilities |
Versions
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%