LivingScreen - Cross-Source Understanding: leaderboard

LivingScreen (Beijing Institute of Technology, 2026) runs multimodal GUI agents on a browser replica of a Chinese short-video app whose videos keep playing, so the agent must choose what to watch and for how long while it swipes, seeks and operates the feed; 499 annotated tasks, 30 steps per episode. This tier asks multiple-choice questions that combine evidence across videos, comments and author information, including unanswerable items; accuracy in percent, random is 25.1, higher is better.

Metric: Success rate (%) on L2 multiple-choice questions linking videos, comments and author information across a feed, including unanswerable items; random 25.1; LivingScreen: 499 Chinese short-video tasks in a browser replica of a short-video app (1,528 real videos, about 5.6 per feed); a single-agent loop issues GUI actions plus watch and wait primitives from screenshots or recorded clips, 30-step cap, temperature 0.6, high reasoning effort; higher is better. Source: arxiv.org. Saturation forecast: Not forecast. 13 models tracked.

Top models

#ModelScoreOverall rank
1Seed 2.0 Pro (High)68.3#211 (Seed 2.0 Pro)
2Gemini 3.1 Pro (Preview) (High)64.2#94 (Gemini 3.1 Pro (Preview))
3Gemini 3.5 Flash (High)60.2#101 (Gemini 3.5 Flash)
4Kimi K2.5 (Thinking)55.6#256 (Kimi K2.5)
5GLM-5V Turbo46.8#344
6Claude Opus 4.6 (High)45.1#102 (Claude Opus 4.6)
7Qwen 3.6 Plus (High)39.1#222 (Qwen 3.6 Plus)
8GPT-5.5 (High)38.4#49 (GPT-5.5)
9GPT-5.4 (High)38#123 (GPT-5.4)
10Claude Sonnet 4.6 (High)37.2#161 (Claude Sonnet 4.6)

No result here: #1 Claude Fable 5.2, #2 Gemini 4 Carbon, #5 Claude Opus 5.5.

Interactive version: theaggregate.ai/benchmark?slug=livingscreen-cross-source-understanding · How It Works · Data refreshed daily, snapshot 2026-11-13.