SEED-Bench
Models answer 19,000 human-annotated multiple-choice questions over 12 dimensions of image and video understanding. Scored by accuracy against the answer key.
Many papers report only the image dimensions. Later SEED-Bench-2 and SEED-Bench-2-Plus are separate tests.
In the authors’ words
Based on powerful Large Language Models (LLMs), recent generative Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) have gained prominence as a pivotal research area, exhibiting remarkable capability for both comprehension and generation. In this work, we address the evaluation of generative comprehension in MLLMs as a preliminary step towards a comprehensive assessment of generative models, by introducing a benchmark named SEED-Bench. SEED-Bench consists of 19K multiple choice questions with accurate human annotations (x 6 larger than existing benchmarks), which spans 12 evaluation dimensions including the comprehension of both the image and video modality. We develop an advanced pipeline for generating multiple-choice questions that target specific evaluation dimensions, integrating both automatic filtering and manual verification processes. Multiple-choice questions with groundtruth options derived from human annotation enables an objective and efficient assessment of model performance, eliminating the need for human or GPT intervention during evaluation. We further evaluate the performance of 18 models across all 12 dimensions, covering both the spatial and temporal understanding. By revealing the limitations of existing MLLMs through evaluation results, we aim for SEED-Bench to provide insights for motivating future research. We will launch and consistently maintain a leaderboard to provide a platform for the community to assess and investigate model capability.
- 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
LFM2.5-VL-3B leads with 77.7% among models released by Aug 2026
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.
The newest model with a score here came out in Aug 2026, and nobody has reported a newer one. Among the 20 highest-ranked models on the capability index, these have no score yet:
- GPT-6 Astra
- Claude Opus 5.5
- GPT-6.1 Terra
- GPT-6.1 Sol
- and 16 more
- 1 LFM2.5-VL-3B 77.7%
- 2
Janus-Pro-7B 72.1%
- 3 LFM2-VL-1.6B 72%
| # | Model | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | LFM2.5-VL-3B | 77.7% | Aug 2026 | Model card | |
| 2 | | 72.1% | Jan 2025 | Model card | |
| 3 | LFM2-VL-1.6B | 72% | Nov 2025 | Model card |
2 models have held number one since its release in Jul 2023
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.
Labs headline it less often now, last in Aug 2026
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 12 Aug 2026 | LFM2.5-VL-3B | 77.7 | SEED-Bench (image) |
| 12 Aug 2025 | LFM2-VL-1.6B | 72 | SEEDBench_IMG |
| 27 Jan 2025 | 72.1 | SEED |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 28 Nov 2025 | LFM2-VL-1.6B technical report | 72 | SEEDBench, LFM2-VL-1.6B (Table 8) | Capabilities |
| 27 Jan 2025 | | 72.1 | SEED (Table 3) | 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%