Benchmark Almanac

VLMsAreBiased

Qwen 3.8 Max 88.3% leads since Aug 2026 Fading

Models count or identify features in altered images of famous subjects, such as a logo with an added stripe, across 7 domains. Scoring is accuracy.

In the authors’ words

Large language models (LLMs) memorize a vast amount of prior knowledge from the Internet that helps them on downstream tasks but also may notoriously sway their outputs towards wrong or biased answers. In this work, we test how the knowledge about popular subjects hurt the accuracy of vision language models (VLMs) on standard, objective visual tasks of counting and identification. We find that state-of-the-art VLMs are strongly biased (e.g., unable to recognize the 4th stripe has been added to a 3-stripe Adidas logo) scoring an average of 17.05% accuracy in counting (e.g., counting stripes in an Adidas-like logo) across 7 diverse domains from animals, logos, chess, board games, optical illusions, to patterned grids. Removing image backgrounds nearly doubles accuracy (21.09 percentage points), revealing that contextual visual cues trigger these biased responses. Further analysis of VLMs' reasoning patterns shows that counting accuracy initially rises with thinking tokens, reaching ~40%, before declining with excessive reasoning. Our work presents an interesting failure mode in VLMs and a human-supervised automated framework for testing VLM biases. Code and data are available at: vlmsarebiased.github.io.

Abstract of Vision Language Models are Biased (arXiv:2505.23941, CC0)
Made by An Vo et al. Released May 2025 Spatial reasoning and counting All tasks public Last in a launch post Aug 2026 , dropped after it saturated 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.
5
Models scored in lab cards
4
Launch posts list it, from 2 labs
3
System cards report it, from 1 lab

Qwen 3.8 Max leads with 88.3% 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:

  1. 1 Qwen 3.8 Max 88.3%
  2. 2 Seed2.1 Pro 83.6%
  3. 3 Seed2.0 Lite (0428) 80.6%
  4. 4 Seed2.0 Pro 77.4%
  5. 5 Seed1.8 62%
#ModelScoreSettingDateSource
1 Qwen 3.8 Max 88.3% Aug 2026 Model card
2 Seed2.1 Pro 83.6% Jun 2026 Model card
3 Seed2.0 Lite (0428) 80.6% Apr 2026 Model card
4 Seed2.0 Pro 77.4% Feb 2026 Model card
5 Seed1.8 62% Dec 2025 Model card

5 models have held number one since its release in May 2025

Lab claims count from the day the card came out, independent runs from the model’s release.

ByteDance Seed Qwen
Lab claims Passed 85% in Aug 2026, by Qwen 3.8 Max
Qwen 3.8 Max 88.3%

The best score passed 85% in Aug 2026

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 Seed2.1 Pro Seed2.0 Pro Seed1.8 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2026 Near the ceiling (85%) Qwen 3.8 Max Seed2.0 Lite (0428)

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.

ByteDance Seed
Qwen
DateLaunch postScoreAs the post writes it
3 Aug 2026 Qwen 3.8 Max 88.3 VLMsAreBiased
28 Apr 2026 Seed2.0 Lite (0428) 80.6 VLMBias
14 Feb 2026 Seed2.0 Pro 77.4 VLMsAreBiased
18 Dec 2025 Seed1.8 62 VLMsAreBiased

3 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 83.6 VLMsAreBiased (Table 9) Capabilities
21 Mar 2026 Seed1.8 model card 62 VLMsAreBiased (Table 2) Capabilities
14 Feb 2026 Seed2.0 Pro model card 77.4 VLMsAreBiased (Table 8) Capabilities

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%