Video Reality Test
Vision-language models and humans judge whether ASMR videos with tight audio and visual coupling are real or AI-generated. It tests perceptual realism detection.
65 HF paper upvotes. Also used to see whether generated videos can fool the models.
In the authors’ words
With AI-generated videos increasingly indistinguishable from reality, current benchmarks primarily focus on broad semantic alignment and basic physical consistency, offering limited discriminative power for evaluating them. To address this, we introduce VideoASMR-Bench, a benchmark based on Autonomous Sensory Meridian Response (ASMR) videos that emphasizes fine-grained audio-visual perception and sensory immersion. This benchmark aims to answer two key questions: (i) Are today's video understanding models (VLMs) sensitive enough to detect AI-generated ASMR videos by recognizing minor visual, physical, or auditory artifacts? (ii) Can today's video generation models (VGMs) produce convincing ASMR videos with immersive experiences? This benchmark comprises a diverse set of 1,500 high-quality real ASMR videos curated from social media, alongside 2,235 synthetic counterparts generated by nine VGMs. Additionally, we open-source an extensible suite of prompts and reference images, enabling the benchmark to scale dynamically with future video models. Moreover, we design an automatic understanding-generation evaluation framework between VGMs and VLMs, where VGMs aim to produce realistic fake videos to fool the VLMs, while the VLMs seek to detect them, forming an adversarial game between the two parties. Our evaluation on VideoASMR-Bench reveals that even state-of-the-art VLMs, such as Gemini-3-Pro, fail to reliably detect AI-generated ASMR videos. Meanwhile, current frontier video generation models can produce ASMR videos that are difficult for VLMs to distinguish from real ones, while humans can still identify them relatively easily.
- 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
No scores here yet
No lab, leaderboard or Epoch AI run has reported a score for Video Reality Test yet.
No lab model card reports it yet
We read the headline results of 479 launch posts from 51 labs, and none of them list this benchmark.
More 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%