Evaluates fine-grained multimodal perception, visual grounding, and reasoning capabilities of vision-language models. It measures performance across general perception, specific perception (color, counting), and out-of-distribution generalization tasks using a suite of established and custom benchmarks. Use when the user wants to benchmark on ZoomBench, HR-Bench, VStar, CV-Bench, MME-RealWorld, ColorBench, CountQA, MMStar, BabyVision, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports accuracy.
Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Zoombench Eval?
Add the live security badge to your README. It updates with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/qhjqhj00-zoombench-eval)
---
name: zoombench-eval
description: Evaluates fine-grained multimodal perception, visual grounding, and reasoning capabilities of vision-language models. It measures performance across general perception, specific perception (color, counting), and out-of-distribution generalization tasks using a suite of established and custom benchmarks. Use when the user wants to benchmark on ZoomBench, HR-Bench, VStar, CV-Bench, MME-RealWorld, ColorBench, CountQA, MMStar, BabyVision, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports accuracy.
metadata:
skill_kind: dataset_eval
source_arxiv: 2602.11858
bibtex_key: wei2026zooming
confidence: high
---
# zoombench-eval
> Zooming without Zooming: Region-to-Image Distillation for Fine-Grained Multimodal Perception — Lai Wei et al. (2026) (arXiv:2602.11858, 2026)
## What this evaluates
Evaluates fine-grained multimodal perception, visual grounding, and reasoning capabilities of vision-language models. It measures performance across general perception, specific perception (color, counting), and out-of-distribution generalization tasks using a suite of established and custom benchmarks.
## Datasets
- **ZoomBench** — total ?; splits: test (-1); repo https://github.com/inclusionAI/Zooming-without-Zooming
- **HR-Bench** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **VStar** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **CV-Bench** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **MME-RealWorld** — total ?; splits: test-en (-1), test-cn (-1)
- **ColorBench** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **CountQA** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **MMStar** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **BabyVision** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
## Metrics
- `accuracy` **(primary)** — range: percent
- Percentage of correctly answered questions out of the total number of questions in the benchmark.
## Input / output format
**Input**: A single image paired with a text prompt or question.
**Output**: A natural language text response.
## Scoring recipe
```python
def compute_accuracy(predictions, gold_answers):
correct = sum(1 for pred, gold in zip(predictions, gold_answers) if normalize_answer(pred) == normalize_answer(gold))
return (correct / len(gold_answers)) * 100
```
## Common pitfalls
- Benchmarks use varying evaluation protocols (e.g., exact match vs. LLM-as-a-judge) that are not standardized across the suite.
- HR-Bench and MME-RealWorld have multiple resolution/language splits (4K/8K, en/cn) that must be averaged or reported separately to match the paper's 'Avg' column.
- ZoomBench's 'dual-view evaluation' measures performance on both full images and cropped regions, which can be confused with the standard single-pass evaluation.
## Evidence (verbatim from paper)
> We report accuracy (%) for each model. Among open-source models (except GPT-5.1 and Gemini-3-Flash), the best results are highlighted in bold, and the second-best are underlined.
## Citation
```bibtex
@misc{wei2026zooming,
title={Zooming without Zooming: Region-to-Image Distillation for Fine-Grained Multimodal Perception},
author={Lai Wei et al. (2026)},
year={2026},
note={arXiv:2602.11858}
}
```
- arXiv: 2602.11858