Papers › Bongard-OpenWorld: Few-Shot Reasoning for Free-form Visual Concepts in the Real World
Bongard-OpenWorld: Few-Shot Reasoning for Free-form Visual Concepts in the Real World
Rujie Wu, Xiaojian Ma, Zhenliang Zhang, Wei Wang, Qing Li, Song-Chun Zhu, Yizhou Wang
We introduce Bongard-OpenWorld, a new benchmark for evaluating real-world few-shot reasoning for machine vision. It originates from the classical Bongard Problems (BPs): Given two sets of images (positive and negative), the model needs to identify the set that query images belong to by inducing the visual concepts, which is exclusively depicted by images from the positive set. Our benchmark inherits the few-shot concept induction of the original BPs while adding the two novel layers of challenge: 1) open-world free-form concepts, as the visual concepts in Bongard-OpenWorld are unique compositions of terms from an open vocabulary, ranging from object categories to abstract visual attributes and commonsense factual knowledge; 2) real-world images, as opposed to the synthetic diagrams used by many counterparts. In our exploration, Bongard-OpenWorld already imposes a significant challenge to current few-shot reasoning algorithms. We further investigate to which extent the recently introduced Large Language Models (LLMs) and Vision-Language Models (VLMs) can solve our task, by directly probing VLMs, and combining VLMs and LLMs in an interactive reasoning scheme. We even conceived a neuro-symbolic reasoning approach that reconciles LLMs & VLMs with logical reasoning to emulate the human problem-solving process for Bongard Problems. However, none of these approaches manage to close the human-machine gap, as the best learner achieves 64% accuracy while human participants easily reach 91%. We hope Bongard-OpenWorld can help us better understand the limitations of current visual intelligence and facilitate future research on visual agents with stronger few-shot visual reasoning capabilities.
In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.
For agents, Syntology's MCP tool lists every function and class Syntology harvested from this paper and whether it ran (how to connect): get_harvested_code_for_paper(arxiv_id="2310.10207")
Code
Syntology Ran 7 of 10 code samples harvested from 1 repository linked to this paper; 3 have no recorded run. Of those that ran: 1 ran · our draft was wrong; 2 ran · fixture could not drive it; 4 ran with no contract checked.
By repository: official repository: 10 samples from 1 repository, 7 ran. The run record, sample by sample. “Ran” means executed on a synthesized input, not that the code is correct or reproduces the paper.
Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
10 samples harvested; 7 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 3 have no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-24; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.
Licence: 0 of the 10 samples are pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.
Harvested from joyjayng/Bongard-OpenWorld. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.
Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.
Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.
b4edb9b80c9d3e38 · report
3ae55a3a12538d0b · report
691b2fde39c5dae5 · report
55120f2026b56aa2 · report
44c3aa4c610ea3f7 · report
983aa087baf88891 · report
f9fd6241d935f07b · report
223edb92edf72b15 · report
03122b1841d3f72e · report
9687bf7a922f098a · report
Tasks
Datasets
Introduced by this paper, per the archive.
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
| Task | Dataset | Model | Metric | Value | Rank at snapshot | Leaderboard | Report |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Visual Reasoning | Bongard-OpenWorld | Human | 2-Class Accuracy | 91.0 | #3 of 9 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Visual Reasoning | Bongard-OpenWorld | SNAIL | 2-Class Accuracy | 64.0 | #4 of 9 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Visual Reasoning | Bongard-OpenWorld | InstructBLIP + GPT-4 | 2-Class Accuracy | 63.8 | #5 of 9 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Visual Reasoning | Bongard-OpenWorld | BLIP-2 + ChatGPT (Fine-tuned) | 2-Class Accuracy | 63.3 | #6 of 9 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Visual Reasoning | Bongard-OpenWorld | InstructBLIP + ChatGPT + Neuro-Symbolic | 2-Class Accuracy | 55.5 | #7 of 9 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Visual Reasoning | Bongard-OpenWorld | ChatCaptioner + ChatGPT | 2-Class Accuracy | 49.3 | #8 of 9 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Visual Reasoning | Bongard-OpenWorld | Otter | 2-Class Accuracy | 49.3 | #9 of 9 | Archive leaderboard | report |
Ranks are positions in the archive's leaderboards as they stood at the 2025-07-28 snapshot. Results published since then are not among these rows, so a rank here is not a current standing.
Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections