MME-Safety - Relevance Rate: leaderboard

The share of final answers that are logically and semantically relevant to the multimodal query in MME-Safety (Shi et al., 2026), refusals included, over 3,801 manually verified image-text pairs with harmful intent, balanced over nine risk categories and nine combinations of image and text stealth level, judged by GPT-4o. Percent; higher is better.

Metric: Relevance rate (%; share of final answers to 3,801 manually verified image-text pairs with harmful intent across nine risk categories and nine image/text stealth combinations, zero-shot; GPT-4o judge whose response is logically and semantically relevant to the query, refusals included). Source: arxiv.org. Saturation forecast: Estimated already saturated. 17 models tracked.

Top models

#ModelScoreOverall rank
1O4 Mini90.94#354
2Claude Sonnet 4 (Thinking)88.53#397 (Claude Sonnet 4)
3Claude 3.7 Sonnet84.58#455
4Qwen 3 VL 235B A22B Instruct84.24#521
5Gemini 3 Pro83.17#135
6Qwen 3 VL 32B (Thinking)82.58#557
7Qwen 3 VL 235B A22B (Thinking)82.22#451
8Claude 3.7 Sonnet (Thinking)82.14#455 (Claude 3.7 Sonnet)
9Qwen 3 VL 8B (Thinking)81.17#887

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

Interactive version: theaggregate.ai/benchmark?slug=mme-safety-relevance-rate · How It Works · Data refreshed daily, snapshot 2026-11-12.