WorldBench
Seed2.1 Pro 67.6% Only in system cards Models answer hand-written reasoning questions about images drawn from a taxonomy of thousands of visual concepts. Questions were kept only if frontier models failed them.
The paper evaluates 15 models and the best reaches 64.0 percent. ByteDance Seed reports it in the Seed2.1 model card.
In the authors’ words
In real-world applications, models are expected to perform reliably across diverse settings. Yet, many existing multimodal benchmarks expand task types without capturing the visual diversity needed to handle open-ended visual inputs. We present WorldBench, a challenging and visually diverse reasoning benchmark to evaluate Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs). We build a taxonomy of thousands of visual concepts across multiple domains (e.g., living things). Guided by this taxonomy, we curate a broad collection of images from search engines and existing datasets to comprehensively represent the visual world. Through structured trial-and-error, we manually design challenging questions that frontier MLLMs fail to answer. On quantitative and human evaluations, WorldBench achieves higher visual diversity than any existing diverse benchmark. Evaluating 15 MLLMs on WorldBench reveals weaknesses in visual understanding: even the strongest model reaches only 64.0% accuracy, while some models perform marginally above chance-level. We hope our work highlights the importance of visual diversity in building multimodal benchmarks.
- Level
- Expert Specialists with years of training, often over hours of work
- 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.
Seed2.1 Pro leads with 67.6%
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 Seed2.1 Pro 67.6%
| # | Model | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Seed2.1 Pro | 67.6% | 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.
Labs report it only in system cards
We read the headline results of 479 launch posts from 51 labs, and none of them list this benchmark. Some system cards do, below.
One system card reports it
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.
| Date | Document | Score | As the document writes it | Section |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 23 Jun 2026 | Seed2.1 Pro model card | 67.6 | WorldBench (Table 9) | Capabilities |
More 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%