Blind-Spots-Bench: Evaluating Blind Spots in Multimodal Models

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2607.08317v1
• Date: Thu, 09 Jul 2026 09:56:50 GMT
• Title: Blind-Spots-Bench: Evaluating Blind Spots in Multimodal Models
• Abstract summary: Modern AI models achieve strong performance on many established benchmarks, yet they still fail on tasks that humans find almost trivial.<n>We introduce $textttblind-spots-bench$, a benchmark designed to expose such blind spots through tasks that appear simple for humans but remain challenging for modern AI.
• Score: 4.652656670051718
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Modern AI models achieve strong performance on many established benchmarks, yet they still fail on tasks that humans find almost trivial, such as manipulating a string or drawing a dog with five legs. These examples suggest that existing benchmarks may under-measure persistent blind spots in current systems. We introduce $\texttt{blind-spots-bench}$, a benchmark designed to expose such blind spots through tasks that appear simple for humans but remain challenging for modern AI. We collect raw questions from students in an AI course, clean and annotate them with structured reference solutions, and propose a task taxonomy tailored to the resulting dataset of 235 samples. We further develop an automated grading pipeline to evaluate a wide range of models, including open-weight and closed-source language, vision-language, and image-generation models. Our analysis on $\texttt{blind-spots-bench}$ reveals that closed-source frontier models can substantially outperform open-weight models with even $\approx10\%$ gap, even when they attain comparable performance on existing benchmarks. A more fine-grained analysis shows that no single model dominates across all task types, and that some tasks remain challenging for all evaluated models. These results highlight the value of $\texttt{blind-spots-bench}$ as a diagnostic stress test for identifying concrete weaknesses in current modern models.

Related papers

• Paying More Attention to Visual Tokens in Self-Evolving Large Multimodal Models [54.097381112138]
  Current self-evolving LMMs struggle on vision-language understanding tasks such as image captioning and visual question answering.<n>We propose VISE, a purely unsupervised self-evolving framework that directly regularizes the model's visual conditioning policy.<n>VISE operates within a single model without specialist roles, external reward models, or annotations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-25T17:59:55Z)
• Benchmark Designers Should "Train on the Test Set" to Expose Exploitable Non-Visual Shortcuts [49.99400612296149]
  We find that models can ace many benchmarks without strong visual understanding.<n>This is especially problematic for vision-centric benchmarks that are meant to require visual inputs.<n>We adopt a diagnostic principle for benchmark design: if a benchmark can be gamed, it will be gamed.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-06T18:43:21Z)
• Reasoning Multimodal Large Language Model: Data Contamination and Dynamic Evaluation [9.434966074326056]
  Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) show impressive vision-language benchmark performance, yet growing concerns about data contamination risk masking true generalization.<n>We propose a novel dynamic evaluation framework to rigorously assess MLLM generalization, moving beyond static benchmarks.<n>We demonstrate that fine-tuning on simulated test data (extreme contamination) drastically sharpens task-specific performance but harms overall generalization.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-08T15:52:38Z)
• Ranked from Within: Ranking Large Multimodal Models Without Labels [73.96543593298426]
  We show that uncertainty scores derived from softmax distributions provide a robust basis for ranking models across various tasks.<n>This facilitates the ranking of LMMs on unlabeled data, providing a practical approach for selecting models for diverse target domains without requiring manual annotation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-09T13:05:43Z)
• Dynamic Intelligence Assessment: Benchmarking LLMs on the Road to AGI with a Focus on Model Confidence [3.4049215220521933]
  We introduce Dynamic Intelligence Assessment (DIA), a novel methodology for testing AI models. The framework introduces four new metrics to assess a model's reliability and confidence across multiple attempts. The accompanying dataset, DIA-Bench, contains a diverse collection of challenge templates with mutable parameters presented in various formats.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-20T20:07:36Z)
• LiveXiv -- A Multi-Modal Live Benchmark Based on Arxiv Papers Content [62.816876067499415]
  We propose LiveXiv: a scalable evolving live benchmark based on scientific ArXiv papers.<n>LiveXiv accesses domain-specific manuscripts at any given timestamp and proposes to automatically generate visual question-answer pairs.<n>We benchmark multiple open and proprietary Large Multi-modal Models (LMMs) on the first version of our benchmark, showing its challenging nature and exposing the models true abilities.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-14T17:51:23Z)
• Data-efficient Large Vision Models through Sequential Autoregression [58.26179273091461]
  We develop an efficient, autoregression-based vision model on a limited dataset. We demonstrate how this model achieves proficiency in a spectrum of visual tasks spanning both high-level and low-level semantic understanding. Our empirical evaluations underscore the model's agility in adapting to various tasks, heralding a significant reduction in the parameter footprint.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-07T13:41:53Z)
• Dissecting Multimodality in VideoQA Transformer Models by Impairing Modality Fusion [54.33764537135906]
  VideoQA Transformer models demonstrate competitive performance on standard benchmarks. Do these models capture the rich multimodal structures and dynamics from video and text jointly? Are they achieving high scores by exploiting biases and spurious features?
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-15T06:45:46Z)
• Scalable Performance Analysis for Vision-Language Models [26.45624201546282]
  Joint vision-language models have shown great performance over a diverse set of tasks. Our paper introduces a more scalable solution that relies on already annotated benchmarks. We confirm previous findings that CLIP behaves like a bag of words model and performs better with nouns and verbs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-30T06:40:08Z)
• RethinkCWS: Is Chinese Word Segmentation a Solved Task? [81.11161697133095]
  The performance of the Chinese Word (CWS) systems has gradually reached a plateau with the rapid development of deep neural networks. In this paper, we take stock of what we have achieved and rethink what's left in the CWS task.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-11-13T11:07:08Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.