Evaluates vision-language models' ability to perform spatial understanding, metric measuring, 2D/3D referring, and multi-step visual tracing in cluttered environments. It probes geometric reasoning, depth estimation, and collision-free path planning for robotic manipulation. Use when the user wants to benchmark on CV-Bench, BLINK_val, RoboSpatial, Embspacial, Q-spatial, MSMU, Where2Place, RefSpatial-Bench, ShareRobot-Bench, VABench-V, TraceSpatial-Bench, RoboTwin, MMEtest, MMBenchdev, OK-VQA,...
Scanned 9/11/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add qhjqhj00/research-skills-pool --skill robotracer-spatial-eval --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Robotracer Spatial Eval?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/qhjqhj00-robotracer-spatial-eval)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: robotracer-spatial-eval
description: Evaluates vision-language models' ability to perform spatial understanding, metric measuring, 2D/3D referring, and multi-step visual tracing in cluttered environments. It probes geometric reasoning, depth estimation, and collision-free path planning for robotic manipulation. Use when the user wants to benchmark on CV-Bench, BLINK_val, RoboSpatial, Embspacial, Q-spatial, MSMU, Where2Place, RefSpatial-Bench, ShareRobot-Bench, VABench-V, TraceSpatial-Bench, RoboTwin, MMEtest, MMBenchdev, OK-VQA, POPE, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports Top-1 success rate (%).
metadata:
skill_kind: dataset_eval
source_arxiv: 2512.13660
bibtex_key: zhou2025robotracer
confidence: high
---
# robotracer-spatial-eval
> RoboTracer: Mastering Spatial Trace with Reasoning in Vision-Language Models for Robotics — Enshen Zhou et al. (2025) (arXiv:2512.13660, 2025)
## What this evaluates
Evaluates vision-language models' ability to perform spatial understanding, metric measuring, 2D/3D referring, and multi-step visual tracing in cluttered environments. It probes geometric reasoning, depth estimation, and collision-free path planning for robotic manipulation.
## Datasets
- **CV-Bench** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **BLINK_val** — total ?; splits: val (-1)
- **RoboSpatial** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **Embspacial** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **Q-spatial** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **MSMU** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **Where2Place** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **RefSpatial-Bench** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **ShareRobot-Bench** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **VABench-V** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **TraceSpatial-Bench** — total 100; splits: test (100)
- **RoboTwin** — total 19; splits: test (19)
- **MMEtest** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **MMBenchdev** — total ?; splits: dev (-1)
- **OK-VQA** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **POPE** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
## Metrics
- `Top-1 success rate (%)` **(primary)** — range: percent
- Percentage of instances where the predicted spatial trace or referring point exactly matches the ground truth within a defined tolerance, with top-1 indicating the single best prediction.
- `Discrete Fréchet Distance (DFD)` — range: other
- Measures the similarity between two trajectory curves (predicted vs. ground truth) in a discrete space. Lower values indicate better alignment.
- `Hausdorff Distance (HD)` — range: other
- The maximum distance from a point in one set to the closest point in the other set. Lower values indicate tighter trace alignment.
- `Root Mean Square Error (RMSE)` — range: other
- Square root of the average of squared differences between predicted and ground truth coordinates. Lower values indicate higher precision.
## Input / output format
**Input**: RGB images, optionally augmented with camera intrinsics and absolute depth maps, paired with natural language instructions describing the spatial task.
**Output**: Predicted 2D masks/points, 3D bounding boxes or coordinates, and trajectory paths; evaluated as success/failure flags or distance metrics.
## Scoring recipe
```python
def evaluate(predictions, gold):
correct = sum(1 for p, g in zip(predictions, gold) if is_within_tolerance(p, g))
success_rate = (correct / len(predictions)) * 100
dfd = discrete_frechet_distance(predictions, gold)
hd = hausdorff_distance(predictions, gold)
rmse = np.sqrt(np.mean((np.array(predictions) - np.array(gold))**2))
multi_step_success = all(is_collision_free(p) and is_correct_start_end(p, g) for p, g in zip(predictions, gold))
return success_rate, dfd, hd, rmse, multi_step_success
```
## Common pitfalls
- Models often produce 'floating' or colliding traces in 3D due to inaccurate depth estimation when only RGB inputs are provided.
- Evaluating 2D referring tasks without accounting for the decoupled point formulation or dimensionality reduction used in training can lead to unfair comparisons.
- Assuming success in 2D spatial referring implies success in 3D multi-step tracing, which requires explicit geometric reasoning and collision-free path validation.
## Evidence (verbatim from paper)
> Top-1/-2 success rate (%) are indicated by bold/underlined text. DFD/HD/RMSE are Discrete Fréchet Distance, Hausdorff Distance, Root Mean Square Error.
## Citation
```bibtex
@misc{zhou2025robotracer,
title={RoboTracer: Mastering Spatial Trace with Reasoning in Vision-Language Models for Robotics},
author={Enshen Zhou et al. (2025)},
year={2025},
note={arXiv:2512.13660}
}
```
- arXiv: 2512.13660
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!