Benchmark Almanac

TOMATO

Seed2.1 Pro 79.5% leads since Jun 2026 Fading

Models answer 1,484 human-written questions about 1,417 videos that need visual temporal reasoning, such as action counts, direction, rotation and velocity. Scored by accuracy.

Published at ICLR 2025. At release the best model trailed humans by 57.3 points.

In the authors’ words

Existing benchmarks often highlight the remarkable performance achieved by state-of-the-art Multimodal Foundation Models (MFMs) in leveraging temporal context for video understanding. However, how well do the models truly perform visual temporal reasoning? Our study of existing benchmarks shows that this capability of MFMs is likely overestimated as many questions can be solved by using a single, few, or out-of-order frames. To systematically examine current visual temporal reasoning tasks, we propose three principles with corresponding metrics: (1) Multi-Frame Gain, (2) Frame Order Sensitivity, and (3) Frame Information Disparity. Following these principles, we introduce TOMATO, Temporal Reasoning Multimodal Evaluation, a novel benchmark crafted to rigorously assess MFMs' temporal reasoning capabilities in video understanding. TOMATO comprises 1,484 carefully curated, human-annotated questions spanning six tasks (i.e., action count, direction, rotation, shape & trend, velocity & frequency, and visual cues), applied to 1,417 videos, including 805 self-recorded and -generated videos, that encompass human-centric, real-world, and simulated scenarios. Our comprehensive evaluation reveals a human-model performance gap of 57.3% with the best-performing model. Moreover, our in-depth analysis uncovers more fundamental limitations beyond this gap in current MFMs. While they can accurately recognize events in isolated frames, they fail to interpret these frames as a continuous sequence. We believe TOMATO will serve as a crucial testbed for evaluating the next-generation MFMs and as a call to the community to develop AI systems capable of comprehending human world dynamics through the video modality.

Abstract of TOMATO: Assessing Visual Temporal Reasoning Capabilities in Multimodal Foundation Models (arXiv:2410.23266, CC0)
Made by Yale University and Allen Institute for AI Released Oct 2024 Video understanding All tasks public Last in a launch post Jun 2026 , dropped before it saturated Last model added Jun 2026 Scores refreshed 2 Nov 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
Multiple choice
5
Models scored in lab cards
4
Launch posts list it, from 1 lab
4
System cards report it, from 1 lab

Seed2.1 Pro leads with 79.5% among models released by Jun 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 Jun 2026, and nobody has reported a newer one. Among the 20 highest-ranked models on the capability index, these have no score yet:

  1. 1 Seed2.1 Pro 79.5%
  2. 2 Seed2.0 Lite (0428) 72.5%
  3. 3 Seed1.8 60.8%
  4. 4 Seed2.0 Pro 59.9%
  5. 5 Seed1.5-VL 44.7%
#ModelScoreSettingDateSource
1 Seed2.1 Pro 79.5% Jun 2026 Model card
2 Seed2.0 Lite (0428) 72.5% Apr 2026 Model card
3 Seed1.8 60.8% Dec 2025 Model card
4 Seed2.0 Pro 59.9% Feb 2026 Model card
5 Seed1.5-VL 44.7% May 2025 Model card

The benchmark's own leaderboard has 31 entries, 22 of them models we track. We plot every source in the charts below.

Number one over time

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.

Other labs ByteDance Seed
Own leaderboard Not tested since Dec 2024
Lab claims Not tested since Jun 2026
Seed2.1 Pro 79.5%

Scores over time

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

On the benchmark’s own leaderboard Reported by the lab in its model card Best so far
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2024 2025 2026 Near the ceiling (85%) Seed2.1 Pro Seed2.0 Lite (0428) Seed1.8 Seed1.5-VL Qwen2-VL-72B-Instruct Claude 3 Opus Video-LLaVA-7B 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2024 2025 2026 Near the ceiling (85%) Seed2.1 Pro Seed2.0 Lite (0428)

Labs headline it less often now, last in Jun 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.

ByteDance Seed
DateLaunch postScoreAs the post writes it
23 Jun 2026 Seed2.1 Pro 79.5 TOMATO
28 Apr 2026 Seed2.0 Lite (0428) 72.5 TOMATO
18 Dec 2025 Seed1.8 60.8 TOMATO
12 May 2025 Seed1.5-VL 44.7 TOMATO

4 system cards report it, from 1 lab

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
23 Jun 2026 Seed2.1 Pro model card 79.5 TOMATO (Table 10) Capabilities
21 Mar 2026 Seed1.8 model card 60.8 TOMATO (Table 3). The 2.2 text says 60.6 Capabilities
14 Feb 2026 Seed2.0 Pro model card 59.9 TOMATO 59.9, 65.3 with the Thinking with Tracking prompt (Table 9) Capabilities
11 May 2025 Seed1.5-VL technical report 44.7 TOMATO, thinking (Table 7). Non-thinking 44.2 Capabilities

More in Audio and video

All 168 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%
  • 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%
  • TVBench In use Models answer multiple-choice questions on 10 temporal video tasks, such as action counting and ordering, that static frames cannot solve. Scored by accuracy. Qwen 3.8 Max 81.9%