Evaluates Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) on automatic sports refereeing tasks, probing their ability to detect incidents, classify fouls, apply sport-specific rules, and ground decisions temporally across 11 different sports. Use when the user wants to benchmark on RefereeBench, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports accuracy.
Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Refereebench Eval?
Add the live security badge to your README. It updates with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/qhjqhj00-refereebench-eval)
---
name: refereebench-eval
description: Evaluates Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) on automatic sports refereeing tasks, probing their ability to detect incidents, classify fouls, apply sport-specific rules, and ground decisions temporally across 11 different sports. Use when the user wants to benchmark on RefereeBench, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports accuracy.
metadata:
skill_kind: dataset_eval
source_arxiv: 2604.15736
bibtex_key: [REDACTED]
confidence: high
---
# refereebench-eval
> RefereeBench: Are Video MLLMs Ready to be Multi-Sport Referees — Xu et al. (2026) (arXiv:2604.15736, 2026)
## What this evaluates
Evaluates Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) on automatic sports refereeing tasks, probing their ability to detect incidents, classify fouls, apply sport-specific rules, and ground decisions temporally across 11 different sports.
## Datasets
- **RefereeBench** — total 6475; splits: test (6475)
## Metrics
- `accuracy` **(primary)** — range: percent
- Computed by directly comparing the model’s predicted answer with the ground truth answer. A match yields 1, otherwise 0. Averaged over all QA pairs.
## Input / output format
**Input**: A full video clip (fixed at 720p resolution, model's default FPS) paired with a multiple-choice question describing a sports officiating scenario.
**Output**: The model's selected multiple-choice answer.
## Scoring recipe
```python
def compute_accuracy(predictions, gold):
correct = sum(1 for p, g in zip(predictions, gold) if p.strip().lower() == g.strip().lower())
return (correct / len(gold)) * 100
```
## Common pitfalls
- Models tend to over-call fouls on negative samples (legal plays), showing high misidentification rates especially under suggestive wording.
- Performance varies significantly across sports, so a high overall score does not guarantee stable cross-sport generalization.
- Audio modality substantially impacts performance; evaluating with frames-only underestimates model capabilities compared to full video input.
## Evidence (verbatim from paper)
> The accuracy is computed by directly comparing the model’s output with the ground truth answer without the need for any external models.
## Citation
```bibtex
@misc{xu2026refereebench,
title={RefereeBench: Are Video MLLMs Ready to be Multi-Sport Referees},
author={Xu et al. (2026)},
year={2026},
note={arXiv:2604.15736}
}
```
- arXiv: 2604.15736