Benchmark Almanac

PerceptionComp

Only in system cards

1,114 five-choice questions on 279 complex videos. Each question needs evidence from several separate moments, so no single frame answers it.

People who watch a video once score near chance, while experts who can rewatch reach 100%.

Released
March 2026
Kind
Video understanding
Level
Everyday
Scored
Checked automatically
Answers
Multiple choice
Tasks
All public
Last in a system card
October 2026
Last model added
October 2026

In the authors’ words

We introduce PerceptionComp, a manually annotated benchmark for complex, long-horizon, perception-centric video reasoning. PerceptionComp is designed so that no single moment is sufficient: answering each question requires multiple temporally separated pieces of visual evidence and compositional constraints under conjunctive and sequential logic, spanning perceptual subtasks such as objects, attributes, relations, locations, actions, and events, and requiring skills including semantic recognition, visual correspondence, temporal reasoning, and spatial reasoning. The benchmark contains 1,114 highly complex questions on 279 videos from diverse domains including city walk tours, indoor villa tours, video games, and extreme outdoor sports, with 100% manual annotation. Human studies show that PerceptionComp requires substantial test-time thinking and repeated perception steps: participants take much longer than on prior benchmarks, and accuracy drops to near chance (18.97%) when rewatching is disallowed. State-of-the-art MLLMs also perform substantially worse on PerceptionComp than on existing benchmarks: the best model in our evaluation, Gemini-3-Flash, reaches only 45.96% accuracy in the five-choice setting, while open-source models remain below 40%. These results suggest that perception-centric long-horizon video reasoning remains a major bottleneck, and we hope PerceptionComp will help drive progress in perceptual reasoning.

Abstract of PerceptionComp: A Video Benchmark for Complex Perception-Centric Reasoning (arXiv:2603.26653, CC0)
1
Model scored in lab cards
1
System card reports it, from 1 lab

Nemotron 3.5 Super VL leads with 39.4%

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. 1 Nemotron 3.5 Super VL 39.4%

Source: Labs’ model cards

#ModelScoreSettingDateSource
1 Nemotron 3.5 Super VL 39.4% Oct 2026 Lab model card

Scores over time

All the scores we have, one dot each, so a model tested at several settings appears more than once.

Reported by the lab in its model card
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Near the ceiling (85%) Nemotron 3.5 Super VL 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Near the ceiling (85%) Nemotron 3.5 Super VL

Source: Labs’ model cards

Labs report it only in system cards

We read the headline results of 522 launch posts from 52 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.

DateDocumentScoreAs the document writes itSection
Oct 15, 2026 Nemotron 3.5 Super VL technical report 39.4 PercepComp, SpatialClaw harness, with agentic vision training, Table 7 Capabilities

More in Audio and video

All 232 in Audio and video
  • Video-MMMU In use 300 expert-level lecture videos with questions testing perception, comprehension and adaptation of knowledge. Accuracy. Qwen 3.8 Max 88.7%
  • LVBench In use Hours-long video understanding with multiple-choice questions on reasoning, grounding and summarization. Gemini 4 Argon 91.7%
  • MMVU In use 3,000 expert-annotated questions on videos across 27 disciplines. Multiple-choice and open-ended accuracy. Qwen 3.8 Max 82.4%
  • MLVU In use Multi-task long video understanding (minutes to hours) with multiple-choice and generation tasks. Accuracy. Qwen 3.8 Max 90.8%
  • FLEURS In use Models transcribe read speech in 102 languages built from FLoRes-101 sentences. Model cards usually report word error rate, so lower scores are better. Phi-4-multimodal 4.00%
  • VoiceBench In use Spoken instructions with speaker, environment and content variation. Voice assistant responses scored by GPT judge or rules. Qwen3.5-Omni-Plus 93.1%