How Far Are Vision-Language Models from Constructing the Real World? A Benchmark for Physical Generative Reasoning

Luyu Yang, Yutong Dai, An Yan, Viraj Prabhu, Ran Xu, Zeyuan Chen · Mar 25, 2026 · Citations: 0

Open arXiv Find Implementation RSS feed Shortlist (0)

How to use this page

Low trust

Use this as background context only. Do not make protocol decisions from this page alone.

Best use

Background context only

What to verify

Read the full paper before copying any benchmark, metric, or protocol choices.

Evidence quality

Low

Derived from extracted protocol signals and abstract evidence.

Abstract

The physical world is not merely visual; it is governed by rigorous structural and procedural constraints. Yet, the evaluation of vision-language models (VLMs) remains heavily skewed toward perceptual realism, prioritizing the generation of visually plausible 3D layouts, shapes, and appearances. Current benchmarks rarely test whether models grasp the step-by-step processes and physical dependencies required to actually build these artifacts, a capability essential for automating design-to-construction pipelines. To address this, we introduce DreamHouse, a novel benchmark for physical generative reasoning: the capacity to synthesize artifacts that concurrently satisfy geometric, structural, constructability, and code-compliance constraints. We ground this benchmark in residential timber-frame construction, a domain with fully codified engineering standards and objectively verifiable correctness. We curate over 26,000 structures spanning 13 architectural styles, ach verified to construction-document standards (LOD 350) and develop a deterministic 10-test structural validation framework. Unlike static benchmarks that assess only final outputs, DreamHouse supports iterative agentic interaction. Models observe intermediate build states, generate construction actions, and receive structured environmental feedback, enabling a fine-grained evaluation of planning, structural reasoning, and self-correction. Extensive experiments with state-of-the-art VLMs reveal substantial capability gaps that are largely invisible on existing leaderboards. These findings establish physical validity as a critical evaluation axis orthogonal to visual realism, highlighting physical generative reasoning as a distinct and underdeveloped frontier in multimodal intelligence. Available at https://luluyuyuyang.github.io/dreamhouse

Abstract-only analysis — low confidence

All signals on this page are inferred from the abstract only and may be inaccurate. Do not use this page as a primary protocol reference.

This paper looks adjacent to evaluation work, but not like a strong protocol reference.
The available metadata is too thin to trust this as a primary source.
The abstract does not clearly describe the evaluation setup.
The abstract does not clearly name benchmarks or metrics.

Human Eval Hub LLM-as-Judge Hub Pairwise Preference Hub

Should You Rely On This Paper?

This paper is adjacent to HFEPX scope and is best used for background context, not as a primary protocol reference.

Best use

Background context only

Use if you need

Background context only.

Main weakness

This paper looks adjacent to evaluation work, but not like a strong protocol reference.

Trust level

Low

Usefulness score

0/100 • Low

Treat as adjacent context, not a core eval-method reference.

Human Feedback Signal

Not explicit in abstract metadata

Evaluation Signal

Weak / implicit signal

Usefulness for eval research

Adjacent candidate

Extraction confidence 15%

If you are doing eval pipeline work, start here:

Human Eval Hub LLM-as-Judge Hub Pairwise Preference Hub Tool-Use Eval Hub

What We Could Verify

These are the protocol signals we could actually recover from the available paper metadata. Use them to decide whether this paper is worth deeper reading.