<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>BabyVision: Visual Reasoning Beyond Language · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2601.06521/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2601.06521/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>BabyVision: Visual Reasoning Beyond Language — mentioned by vintermann</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50129684</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:2601.06521:50129684</guid><pubDate>Sat, 17 Oct 2026 10:18:43 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;I&amp;#x27;d never heard of the BabyVision benchmark they do so well on. Pretty interesting stuff: https://arxiv.org/abs/2601.06521&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2601.06521/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>cs.CV</category></item><item><title>BabyVision: Visual Reasoning Beyond Language — mentioned by Jackson__</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46776911</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:2601.06521:46776911</guid><pubDate>Tue, 27 Jan 2026 08:10:33 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;As your local vision nut, their claims about &amp;quot;SOTA&amp;quot; vision are absolutely BS in my tests. Sure it&amp;#x27;s SOTA at standard vision benchmarks. But on tasks that require proper image understanding, see for example BabyVision[0] it appears very much lacking compared to Gemini 3 Pro. [0] https://arxiv.org/html/2601.06521v1&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2601.06521/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>cs.CV</category></item></channel></rss>
