Benchmark Almanac

SURDS

Qwen 3.8 Max 77.8% In use

Models answer spatial questions about objects in nuScenes driving camera images across six single-object and multi-object tasks. Scoring is task accuracy.

The first arXiv version was called DriveMLLM before the authors renamed it SURDS.

In the authors’ words

Accurate spatial reasoning in outdoor environments - covering geometry, object pose, and inter-object relationships - is fundamental to downstream tasks such as mapping, motion forecasting, and high-level planning in autonomous driving. We introduce SURDS, a large-scale benchmark designed to systematically evaluate the spatial reasoning capabilities of vision language models (VLMs). Built on the nuScenes dataset, SURDS comprises 41,080 vision-question-answer training instances and 9,250 evaluation samples, spanning six spatial categories: orientation, depth estimation, pixel-level localization, pairwise distance, lateral ordering, and front-behind relations. We benchmark leading general-purpose VLMs, including GPT, Gemini, and Qwen, revealing persistent limitations in fine-grained spatial understanding. To address these deficiencies, we go beyond static evaluation and explore whether alignment techniques can improve spatial reasoning performance. Specifically, we propose a reinforcement learning-based alignment scheme leveraging spatially grounded reward signals - capturing both perception-level accuracy (location) and reasoning consistency (logic). We further incorporate final-answer correctness and output-format rewards to guide fine-grained policy adaptation. Our GRPO-aligned variant achieves an overall score of 40.80 in the SURDS benchmark. Notably, it outperforms proprietary systems such as GPT-4o (13.30) and Gemini-2.0-flash (35.71). To our best knowledge, this is the first study to demonstrate that reinforcement learning-based alignment can significantly and consistently enhance the spatial reasoning capabilities of VLMs in real-world driving contexts. We release the SURDS benchmark, evaluation toolkit, and GRPO alignment code through: https://github.com/XiandaGuo/Drive-MLLM.

Abstract of SURDS: Benchmarking Spatial Understanding and Reasoning in Driving Scenarios with Vision Language Models (arXiv:2411.13112, CC0)
Made by Xianda Guo et al. (Wuhan University and partners) Released Nov 2024 Spatial reasoning and counting All tasks public Last in a launch post Aug 2026 Last model added Aug 2026
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
Short answer A number, word or short string matched to a key.
2
Models scored in lab cards
2
Launch posts list it, from 1 lab

Qwen 3.8 Max leads with 77.8%

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. 1 Qwen 3.8 Max 77.8%
  2. 2 Qwen3.7-Plus 77.2%
#ModelScoreSettingDateSource
1 Qwen 3.8 Max 77.8% Aug 2026 Model card
2 Qwen3.7-Plus 77.2% Jun 2026 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 Best so far
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2026 Near the ceiling (85%) Qwen 3.8 Max Qwen3.7-Plus 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2026 Near the ceiling (85%) Qwen 3.8 Max

One lab 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.

Qwen
DateLaunch postScoreAs the post writes it
3 Aug 2026 Qwen 3.8 Max 77.8 SURDS
1 Jun 2026 Qwen3.7-Plus 77.2 SURDS

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%