Benchmark Almanac

R-Bench (real-world robustness)

InternVL3.5-241B-A28B 75.4% Only in system cards

Models answer questions about images degraded by 33 kinds of real-world corruption, from capture to display. Scores compare distorted and reference images.

The set has 2,970 human-labeled question answer pairs. It is not the RBench video generation benchmark from Peking University.

In the authors’ words

The outstanding performance of Large Multimodal Models (LMMs) has made them widely applied in vision-related tasks. However, various corruptions in the real world mean that images will not be as ideal as in simulations, presenting significant challenges for the practical application of LMMs. To address this issue, we introduce R-Bench, a benchmark focused on the **Real-world Robustness of LMMs**. Specifically, we: (a) model the complete link from user capture to LMMs reception, comprising 33 corruption dimensions, including 7 steps according to the corruption sequence, and 7 groups based on low-level attributes; (b) collect reference/distorted image dataset before/after corruption, including 2,970 question-answer pairs with human labeling; (c) propose comprehensive evaluation for absolute/relative robustness and benchmark 20 mainstream LMMs. Results show that while LMMs can correctly handle the original reference images, their performance is not stable when faced with distorted images, and there is a significant gap in robustness compared to the human visual system. We hope that R-Bench will inspire improving the robustness of LMMs, **extending them from experimental simulations to the real-world application**. Check https://q-future.github.io/R-Bench for details.

Abstract of R-Bench: Are your Large Multimodal Model Robust to Real-world Corruptions? (arXiv:2410.05474, CC0)
Made by Shanghai Jiao Tong University , Nanyang Technological University and others Released Oct 2024 General visual questions All tasks public Last in a system card Nov 2025 Last model added Nov 2025
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
2
Models scored in lab cards
2
System cards report it, from 2 labs

InternVL3.5-241B-A28B leads with 75.4%

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 InternVL3.5-241B-A28B 75.4%
  2. 2 Nemotron Nano 12B v2 VL 69.7%
#ModelScoreSettingDateSource
1 InternVL3.5-241B-A28B 75.4% Aug 2025 Model card
2 Nemotron Nano 12B v2 VL 69.7% Nov 2025 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% 2026 Near the ceiling (85%) InternVL3.5-241B-A28B 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2026 Near the ceiling (85%) InternVL3.5-241B-A28B

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.

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.

DateDocumentScoreAs the document writes itSection
6 Nov 2025 Nemotron Nano 12B v2 VL technical report 69.7 R-Bench (dis), reasoning on (Table 3). Reasoning off 75.2 Capabilities
25 Aug 2025 InternVL3.5-241B-A28B technical report 75.4 R-Bench (dis) (Table 5) Robustness

More in Vision

All 234 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%