Evaluates a cross-embodied foundation model's capabilities in affordance prediction, task planning, spatial understanding, and autonomous driving perception/prediction/planning across diverse visual and language inputs. Use when the user wants to benchmark on RoboRefIt, Where2Place, VABench-Point, Part-Afford, RoboAfford-Eval, EgoPlan2, RoboVQA, Cosmos-Reason1, CV-Bench, ERQA, EmbSpatial, SAT, RoboSpatial, RefSpatial-Bench, CRPE-relation, MetaVQA, VSI-Bench, CODA-LM, DRAMA, MME-RealWorld, IDK...
Scanned 9/11/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add qhjqhj00/research-skills-pool --skill mimo-embodied-eval --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Mimo Embodied Eval?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/qhjqhj00-mimo-embodied-eval)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: mimo-embodied-eval
description: Evaluates a cross-embodied foundation model's capabilities in affordance prediction, task planning, spatial understanding, and autonomous driving perception/prediction/planning across diverse visual and language inputs. Use when the user wants to benchmark on RoboRefIt, Where2Place, VABench-Point, Part-Afford, RoboAfford-Eval, EgoPlan2, RoboVQA, Cosmos-Reason1, CV-Bench, ERQA, EmbSpatial, SAT, RoboSpatial, RefSpatial-Bench, CRPE-relation, MetaVQA, VSI-Bench, CODA-LM, DRAMA, MME-RealWorld, IDKB, OmniDrive, NuInstruct, DriveLM, MAPLM, nuScenes-QA, LingoQA, BDD-X, DriveAction, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports precision.
metadata:
skill_kind: dataset_eval
source_arxiv: 2511.16518
bibtex_key: hao2025mimoembodied
confidence: high
---
# mimo-embodied-eval
> MiMo-Embodied: X-Embodied Foundation Model Technical Report — Hao et al. (2025) (arXiv:2511.16518, 2025)
## What this evaluates
Evaluates a cross-embodied foundation model's capabilities in affordance prediction, task planning, spatial understanding, and autonomous driving perception/prediction/planning across diverse visual and language inputs.
## Datasets
- **RoboRefIt** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **Where2Place** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **VABench-Point** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **Part-Afford** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **RoboAfford-Eval** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **EgoPlan2** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **RoboVQA** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **Cosmos-Reason1** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **CV-Bench** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **ERQA** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **EmbSpatial** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **SAT** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **RoboSpatial** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **RefSpatial-Bench** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **CRPE-relation** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **MetaVQA** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **VSI-Bench** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **CODA-LM** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **DRAMA** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **MME-RealWorld** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **IDKB** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **OmniDrive** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **NuInstruct** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **DriveLM** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **MAPLM** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **nuScenes-QA** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **LingoQA** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **BDD-X** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **DriveAction** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
## Metrics
- `precision` **(primary)** — range: percent
- Percentage of correct predictions or spatially valid outputs (e.g., predicted points falling within human-annotated regions) relative to the total number of test instances.
## Input / output format
**Input**: Multimodal inputs consisting of single-view images, multi-view video frames, or panoramic scenes paired with natural language instructions, queries, or action goals.
**Output**: Textual answers, predicted coordinate points, or generated action sequences/plans corresponding to the input instructions or queries.
## Scoring recipe
```python
def compute_precision(predictions, gold):
correct = 0
for pred, gold_item in zip(predictions, gold):
if isinstance(gold_item, dict) and 'region' in gold_item:
if point_in_region(pred, gold_item['region']):
correct += 1
else:
if pred == gold_item or is_semantically_equivalent(pred, gold_item):
correct += 1
return (correct / len(predictions)) * 100
```
## Common pitfalls
- Many benchmarks require custom evaluation scripts (marked with * in tables) rather than official leaderboard scores, so reproducing results requires accessing the authors' evaluation framework.
- Spatial grounding tasks (e.g., VABench-Point) require specific coordinate tolerance thresholds that are not explicitly detailed in the text, making exact replication difficult.
- Some benchmarks evaluate multi-step planning or causal reasoning where outputs are open-ended, requiring LLM-based or heuristic scoring not fully specified.
## Evidence (verbatim from paper)
> The pointing subset of VABench *[[63]]* (VABench-Point) evaluates a model’s precision in grounding natural language commands to specific coordinate locations for robotic manipulation, requiring predicted points to fall within human-annotated regions of target objects or free space. Results marked with * are obtained using our evaluation framework.
## Citation
```bibtex
@misc{hao2025mimoembodied,
title={MiMo-Embodied: X-Embodied Foundation Model Technical Report},
author={Hao et al. (2025)},
year={2025},
note={arXiv:2511.16518}
}
```
- arXiv: 2511.16518
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!