Benchmark Almanac

WildVision

Dropped

Vision-language models answer 500 real user image prompts from the WildVision Arena. A GPT-4 judge compares each answer with a fixed baseline model.

The arena collects human votes and the bench correlates 0.94 with arena Elo.

In the authors’ words

Recent breakthroughs in vision-language models (VLMs) emphasize the necessity of benchmarking human preferences in real-world multimodal interactions. To address this gap, we launched WildVision-Arena (WV-Arena), an online platform that collects human preferences to evaluate VLMs. We curated WV-Bench by selecting 500 high-quality samples from 8,000 user submissions in WV-Arena. WV-Bench uses GPT-4 as the judge to compare each VLM with Claude-3-Sonnet, achieving a Spearman correlation of 0.94 with the WV-Arena Elo. This significantly outperforms other benchmarks like MMVet, MMMU, and MMStar. Our comprehensive analysis of 20K real-world interactions reveals important insights into the failure cases of top-performing VLMs. For example, we find that although GPT-4V surpasses many other models like Reka-Flash, Opus, and Yi-VL-Plus in simple visual recognition and reasoning tasks, it still faces challenges with subtle contextual cues, spatial reasoning, visual imagination, and expert domain knowledge. Additionally, current VLMs exhibit issues with hallucinations and safety when intentionally provoked. We are releasing our chat and feedback data to further advance research in the field of VLMs.

Abstract of WildVision: Evaluating Vision-Language Models in the Wild with Human Preferences (arXiv:2406.11069, CC0)
Made by Allen Institute for AI and UCSB Released Jun 2024 General visual questions All tasks public Last in a launch post Aug 2025 , dropped before it saturated Last model added Nov 2025
Level
Everyday Most adults, without training
Scored
Graded by a model A language model scores each response, usually against a rubric.
Answers
Open-ended Free-form text, documents, designs or media judged as a whole.
1
Launch post lists it, from 1 lab
2
System cards report it, from 2 labs

No scores here yet

No lab, leaderboard or Epoch AI run has reported a score for WildVision yet.

No launch post has listed it since Aug 2025

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.

Shanghai AI Lab
DateLaunch postScoreAs the post writes it
25 Aug 2025 InternVL3.5-241B-A28B 82.8 WildVision

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.

DateDocumentScoreAs the document writes itSection
6 Nov 2025 Nemotron Nano 12B v2 VL technical report 20.2 WildVision (win rate), reasoning on (Table 3). Reasoning off 16.0 Capabilities
25 Aug 2025 InternVL3.5-241B-A28B technical report 82.8 WildVision (win rate) (Table 2, Table 5) 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%