← 研踪 PaperTrailarXiv:2611.16861 · v1
Visual Cipher Bench: Benchmarking LLM Agents on Long-Horizon Visual Reasoning
首次提交 2026-11-12 22:33
版本更新 2026-11-12 22:33
雷达观测 2026-11-13 14:15
摘要
While language-model agents excel at long-horizon coding and terminal tasks, this success relies on two conditions: explicit text specifications and immediate execution feedback. However, neither condition holds in real-world problems where critical information exists only in images, leaving it unclear whether long-horizon capability transfers from text to visual reasoning. In such visual settings, because rules and clues resist text transcription and lack test-case feedback, agents must repeatedly inspect images, simulate spatial transformations, and autonomously cross-check clues. Despite this challenge, existing evaluations fail to capture such capability: visual reasoning benchmarks largely reduce tasks to single-turn, short-chain question answering, whereas agent benchmarks focus on text-based environments or interactive states that permit trial-and-error. To bridge this gap, we introduce Visual Cipher Bench, a collection of 40 original visual puzzles across four categories: spatial manipulation and simulation, logical constraints and planning, rule induction, and knowledge-based decoding. Each puzzle provides only one to three black-and-white line drawings and a minimal submission instruction, requiring agents to discover the underlying solving mechanism entirely from the images. Across 29 reasoning-effort configurations of eight frontier models, even the strongest model, GPT-6 Astra (max), achieves only 26.7% accuracy, while five of the eight models score below 1%. Yet on a ten-task subset, providing a single non-spoiler mechanism hint boosts accuracy from 7.8% to 55.6%. This sharp contrast shows that the primary bottleneck of current agents lies not in executing multi-step plans, but in autonomously discovering rules from visual evidence. Visual Cipher Bench thus provides a rigorous benchmark for measuring long-horizon visual reasoning in agents.
观测到的版本
相邻记录可能跳过中间版本；首次发现 v2 及以上也会标为版本更新。
v1 · 2026-11-12 22:33 · 最新观测版本
Visual Cipher Bench: Benchmarking LLM Agents on Long-Horizon Visual Reasoning
While language-model agents excel at long-horizon coding and terminal tasks, this success relies on two conditions: explicit text specifications and immediate execution feedback. However, neither condition holds in real-world problems where critical information exists only in images, leaving it unclear whether long-horizon capability transfers from text to visual reasoning. In such visual settings, because rules and clues resist text transcription and lack test-case feedback, agents must repeatedly inspect images, simulate spatial transformations, and autonomously cross-check clues. Despite this challenge, existing evaluations fail to capture such capability: visual reasoning benchmarks largely reduce tasks to single-turn, short-chain question answering, whereas agent benchmarks focus on text-based environments or interactive states that permit trial-and-error. To bridge this gap, we introduce Visual Cipher Bench, a collection of 40 original visual puzzles across four categories: spatial manipulation and simulation, logical constraints and planning, rule induction, and knowledge-based decoding. Each puzzle provides only one to three black-and-white line drawings and a minimal submission instruction, requiring agents to discover the underlying solving mechanism entirely from the images. Across 29 reasoning-effort configurations of eight frontier models, even the strongest model, GPT-6 Astra (max), achieves only 26.7% accuracy, while five of the eight models score below 1%. Yet on a ten-task subset, providing a single non-spoiler mechanism hint boosts accuracy from 7.8% to 55.6%. This sharp contrast shows that the primary bottleneck of current agents lies not in executing multi-step plans, but in autonomously discovering rules from visual evidence. Visual Cipher Bench thus provides a rigorous benchmark for measuring long-horizon visual reasoning in agents.
查看此版本解读 →查看此版本原文 ↗