MS COCO (Common Objects in Context) ranks higher at 61/100 vs Xiaomi: MiMo-V2-Omni at 23/100. Capability-level comparison backed by match graph evidence from real search data.
| Feature | Xiaomi: MiMo-V2-Omni | MS COCO (Common Objects in Context) |
|---|---|---|
| Type | Model | Dataset |
| UnfragileRank | 23/100 | 61/100 |
| Adoption |
| 0 |
| 1 |
| Quality | 0 | 1 |
| Ecosystem | 0 | 0 |
| Match Graph | 0 | 0 |
| Pricing | Paid | Free |
| Starting Price | $4.00e-7 per prompt token | — |
| Capabilities | 10 decomposed | 11 decomposed |
| Times Matched | 0 | 0 |
Processes image, video, and audio inputs within a single native architecture rather than separate modality-specific encoders. The model uses a unified token embedding space that allows cross-modal reasoning and grounding without requiring separate preprocessing pipelines or modality-specific adapters. This architectural choice enables the model to maintain semantic relationships across modalities during inference.
Unique: Native unified token space for image, video, and audio rather than cascading separate encoders — eliminates modality-specific preprocessing and enables direct cross-modal token interaction during inference
vs alternatives: Processes video+audio+image in a single forward pass with native cross-modal reasoning, whereas most alternatives (GPT-4V, Claude, Gemini) require separate modality pipelines or sequential processing
Grounds visual objects and events in images and video frames by producing spatial coordinates (bounding boxes, segmentation masks) and temporal indices. The model likely uses attention mechanisms over spatial feature maps and temporal sequences to localize entities referenced in text or audio queries. This enables precise object identification beyond semantic description.
Unique: Grounds objects across video frames using unified multimodal context (audio + visual) rather than vision-only grounding, enabling audio-visual correlation for event localization
vs alternatives: Combines audio context for grounding (e.g., 'find where the speaker is looking') whereas vision-only grounding models like DINO or CLIP-based systems lack audio-visual correlation
Executes multi-step reasoning chains where the model decomposes complex queries into subtasks, calls external tools or functions, and integrates results back into the reasoning loop. The architecture likely supports function-calling schemas (similar to OpenAI's function calling) with native bindings for common APIs. This enables the model to act as an autonomous agent that can refine understanding across multiple inference steps.
Unique: Agentic reasoning operates over multimodal inputs (video+audio+image) rather than text-only, allowing agents to make tool-calling decisions based on visual and audio context
vs alternatives: Enables tool-calling agents that understand video and audio natively, whereas text-only agents (GPT-4, Claude) require separate video-to-text transcription before tool orchestration
Analyzes video sequences to detect, classify, and describe events occurring over time. The model processes video as a sequence of frames (or using video-specific encoders) and identifies temporal boundaries of events, their categories, and relationships. This likely uses temporal attention or recurrent mechanisms to maintain context across frames and identify state changes that constitute events.
Unique: Event detection integrates audio context (speech, sounds) to disambiguate visual events, whereas vision-only video understanding models rely solely on visual motion patterns
vs alternatives: Detects events using audio+visual fusion (e.g., 'person speaking while gesturing') rather than vision-only detection, improving accuracy on audio-dependent events
Correlates audio and visual information to identify synchronized events and ground audio content in visual context. The model aligns audio events (speech, sounds) with corresponding visual phenomena (speaker location, sound source, visual reactions) using cross-modal attention. This enables understanding of multimodal narratives where audio and visual streams are semantically linked.
Unique: Uses unified token space to directly correlate audio and visual features without separate alignment preprocessing, enabling end-to-end audio-visual reasoning
vs alternatives: Performs audio-visual correlation natively in a single forward pass, whereas pipeline approaches (separate audio and visual models + post-hoc alignment) introduce latency and alignment errors
Extracts and transcribes speech from video audio tracks, converting spoken content to text. The model likely uses a speech recognition encoder (possibly shared with the audio processing pipeline) to identify speech segments, recognize phonemes/words, and produce timestamped transcriptions. This integrates with the multimodal architecture to enable text-based querying of video content.
Unique: Speech recognition operates within unified multimodal context, allowing visual cues (lip movement, speaker location) to improve transcription accuracy compared to audio-only ASR
vs alternatives: Leverages visual context (lip-sync, speaker identification) to improve transcription accuracy over audio-only models like Whisper, particularly in noisy or multi-speaker scenarios
Generates natural language descriptions of image content and answers questions about images by analyzing visual features, objects, relationships, and context. The model uses vision encoders to extract visual representations and language decoders to produce coherent text. This capability extends to complex reasoning about image content, including counterfactual questions and abstract concepts.
Unique: Image understanding operates within multimodal context, allowing audio or video context to inform image interpretation when images are part of a larger multimodal input
vs alternatives: Integrates image understanding with video and audio context, enabling richer interpretation than single-image models like CLIP or LLaVA
Classifies audio content and detects specific sound events within audio streams. The model processes audio spectrograms or waveforms to identify sound categories (speech, music, environmental sounds, etc.) and locate temporal boundaries of specific events. This likely uses audio-specific encoders with temporal convolutions or attention mechanisms to capture acoustic patterns.
Unique: Sound classification integrates visual context from video to disambiguate similar sounds (e.g., distinguishing applause from rain based on visual cues), improving classification accuracy
vs alternatives: Leverages audio-visual fusion for sound event detection, whereas audio-only models like PANNs lack visual context for disambiguation
+2 more capabilities
Provides 2.5 million manually-annotated object instances across 330,000 images with dual segmentation encoding: polygon coordinates for precise boundary definition and RLE (run-length encoding) for efficient storage and computation. Each instance includes bounding box coordinates in [x, y, width, height] format, category label from 80 object classes, and instance-level unique identifiers enabling per-object tracking and evaluation. Annotations are structured in JSON format with hierarchical organization linking images to annotations to categories, supporting both dense object scenes and sparse single-object images.
Unique: Dual segmentation encoding (polygon + RLE) in single dataset enables both precise boundary analysis and efficient computational workflows; 2.5M instances across 330K images provides scale unmatched by contemporaneous datasets (ImageNet had ~1.2M images, PASCAL VOC had ~11K images)
vs alternatives: Larger and more densely annotated than PASCAL VOC (11K images, ~6 objects/image) and more task-diverse than ImageNet (classification-only); RLE encoding enables 10-100x faster mask loading than polygon-only formats
Provides keypoint annotations for all people in images using a standardized 17-joint skeleton model (head, shoulders, elbows, wrists, hips, knees, ankles) with (x, y, visibility) tuples per joint. Visibility flag indicates whether keypoint is annotated (1), occluded (0), or outside image bounds (0). Keypoints are linked to parent person instances via instance ID, enabling pose estimation evaluation at both individual and crowd-level scales. Annotations follow COCO Keypoints task specification with consistent coordinate system across all 330K images.
Unique: Standardized 17-joint skeleton with explicit visibility flags enables robust evaluation of pose estimation under occlusion; linked to instance segmentation masks allows joint-level accuracy analysis within person bounding boxes
MS COCO (Common Objects in Context) scores higher at 61/100 vs Xiaomi: MiMo-V2-Omni at 23/100. MS COCO (Common Objects in Context) also has a free tier, making it more accessible.
Need something different?
Search the match graph →© 2026 Unfragile. Stronger through disorder.
vs alternatives: More comprehensive than OpenPose dataset (no visibility flags) and larger scale than Human3.6M (3.6M frames vs 330K images); visibility annotations enable explicit occlusion handling unlike MPII (which lacks visibility metadata)
COCO ecosystem includes community-created extensions (COCO-Stuff, COCO DensePose, COCO Panoptic) that extend base dataset with additional annotations while maintaining compatibility with COCO API and evaluation infrastructure. Extensions follow COCO format and evaluation standards, enabling seamless integration into existing pipelines. Community contributions are vetted and published as official COCO variants, ensuring quality and standardization. Variant creation process is documented, enabling researchers to create custom extensions.
Unique: Standardized extension process enables community contributions while maintaining compatibility; official variants (Stuff, DensePose, Panoptic) are vetted and published, ensuring quality and discoverability
vs alternatives: More extensible than fixed datasets; community variants enable specialized use cases without forking; standardized format prevents fragmentation unlike ad-hoc dataset variants
Provides 1.65 million image-caption pairs (5 captions × 330K images) with natural language descriptions written by human annotators. Each caption is a free-form English sentence describing objects, actions, and scene context without enforced length limits or structured templates. Captions are stored in JSON format linked to image IDs, enabling training of vision-language models for image captioning, visual question answering, and cross-modal retrieval. Multiple captions per image capture linguistic diversity and alternative descriptions of the same visual content.
Unique: 5 captions per image (vs 1 in most datasets) captures linguistic diversity and enables robust evaluation of caption generation variability; 1.65M caption-image pairs provide scale for training large vision-language models
vs alternatives: 5x more captions per image than Flickr30K (1 caption/image) enabling better linguistic diversity modeling; larger scale than Visual Genome (108K images) while maintaining natural language quality vs automated alt-text
Extends base 80 object categories with 91 additional 'stuff' categories (background materials, textures, regions like sky, grass, wall) enabling dense semantic segmentation of entire images. Stuff categories are annotated as pixel-level masks without instance boundaries — all sky pixels are labeled 'sky' regardless of continuity. COCO-Stuff combines instance segmentation (80 objects) with semantic segmentation (171 total categories including stuff), stored as single-channel PNG masks where pixel value encodes category ID. Enables panoptic segmentation evaluation combining instance and stuff predictions.
Unique: 171-category taxonomy combining 80 instance objects + 91 stuff categories enables panoptic segmentation in single dataset; pixel-level masks for stuff enable dense scene understanding without instance boundaries
vs alternatives: More comprehensive than ADE20K (150 categories) and larger scale than Cityscapes (5K images); unified instance+stuff annotation enables panoptic evaluation unlike separate semantic/instance datasets
Combines instance segmentation (80 object categories with boundaries) and semantic segmentation (171 stuff categories without boundaries) into single panoptic prediction task. Evaluation uses Panoptic Quality (PQ) metric decomposed into Segmentation Quality (SQ — IoU of matched predictions) and Recognition Quality (RQ — detection rate). Panoptic masks encode both category ID and instance ID, enabling evaluation of both 'what' (category) and 'which' (instance identity) predictions. Standardized evaluation protocol with server-side metric computation ensures consistent benchmarking across submissions.
Unique: Panoptic Quality metric with explicit SQ/RQ decomposition enables fine-grained analysis of segmentation vs recognition errors; unified instance+stuff evaluation in single task forces models to handle both prediction types efficiently
vs alternatives: More comprehensive than separate instance/semantic benchmarks; PQ metric better captures real-world scene understanding than independent metrics; standardized evaluation prevents metric gaming unlike custom evaluation scripts
Provides dense 2D-to-3D correspondence maps for human bodies, mapping each pixel in a person instance to a 3D human body model surface. Annotations include UV coordinates (parameterization of 3D body surface) and body part indices enabling pixel-level body surface understanding. DensePose enables training of models that predict where each image pixel corresponds to on a canonical 3D human body, useful for pose transfer, virtual try-on, and detailed human understanding. Available from 2020 dataset version onwards, extends keypoint annotations with dense surface coverage.
Unique: Dense 2D-to-3D surface correspondence enables pixel-level body understanding beyond skeleton keypoints; UV parameterization allows transfer of appearance and shape across different people and poses
vs alternatives: More detailed than keypoint-only annotations (17 joints vs millions of surface points); enables pose transfer unlike keypoint datasets; larger scale than DensePose-specific datasets
Provides standardized evaluation metrics for each task (Average Precision for detection, IoU for segmentation, OKS for keypoints, BLEU/METEOR/CIDEr for captions, PQ for panoptic) computed server-side on held-out test set. Leaderboard system accepts structured JSON result submissions in COCO format, validates format, computes metrics, and ranks submissions by primary metric. Evaluation infrastructure ensures consistent benchmarking across all submissions and prevents metric gaming through standardized computation. Metrics are task-specific: AP/AP50/AP75 for detection, mIoU for segmentation, OKS for keypoints, CIDEr for captions.
Unique: Server-side metric computation prevents metric gaming and ensures consistency; task-specific metrics (AP, OKS, CIDEr, PQ) are standardized across all submissions enabling fair comparison; public leaderboard provides transparency and reproducibility
vs alternatives: More rigorous than self-reported metrics (prevents cherry-picking); standardized evaluation prevents metric implementation variations unlike custom evaluation scripts; public leaderboard enables community comparison unlike proprietary benchmarks
+3 more capabilities