Interactive Visual Gym: Evaluating Visual Interaction Models with Simulated Users in Interactive Worlds
Abstract
Interactive Visual Gym enables closed-loop evaluation and training of visual interaction models by jointly simulating task environments and human users, exposing limitations in state-of-the-art VLMs and improving performance through closed-loop training.
Visual interaction models that support users during ongoing physical tasks require evaluation in closed loop, where assistant responses can change subsequent user behavior and task outcomes. Existing benchmarks largely rely on offline replay and therefore cannot capture these effects. We introduce Interactive Visual Gym, a framework for closed-loop evaluation and training of visual interaction models through joint simulation of executable task environments and human users. We contribute three simulators that recreate everyday tasks and human-aligned action spaces across cooking, household manipulation, and mobile-interface domains, together with a persona-conditioned user simulation harness that collaborates with the assistant while incorporating controlled execution errors and other out-of-plan behaviors. We instantiate the framework as IVG-Bench, a benchmark with 315 interaction scenarios. Evaluating state-of-the-art VLMs as visual interaction models reveals substantial limitations: the best-performing model, Gemini 4 Argon, completes only 53.4% of tasks within the time limit, exhibits significant weaknesses in factual grounding and actionable guidance, and is often too slow to prevent errors when response latency is considered. We verify our evaluation protocol with a human study which finds 78.5% agreement between our interaction-quality metric and participant preferences. We further show that the environments provide useful learning signals: in a proof-of-concept GRPO experiment, closed-loop training improves both task success and interaction quality for Qwen3.5-4B model in our cooking environment.
Community
We introduce Interactive Visual Gym, a framework for evaluating and training visual interaction models in closed loop with simulated human users. IVG-Bench covers 315 interaction scenarios across cooking, household manipulation, and mobile interfaces, with persona-conditioned users and controlled execution errors. The benchmark evaluates task success, interaction quality, and response latency, and includes a human validation study and a proof-of-concept closed-loop training experiment. Code and the interactive leaderboard are available below.
Closed-loop testing with simulated users fits cooking help well, because a slow answer changes what the person does next. The best model finishing only 53.4% of tasks in time is striking, so how much of that came from latency and how much from wrong guidance?
This is an automated message from the Librarian Bot. I found the following papers similar to this paper.
The following papers were recommended by the Semantic Scholar API
- MIMESIS: Learning User Simulators as Training Environments for Interactive Agents (2026)
- DashAct: A Progressive Diagnostic Benchmark for GUI Agents in Interactive Dashboard Analysis (2026)
- Cowork-Gym: Synthesizing Interactive Work Environments at Scale (2026)
- LOLPlay: Benchmarking Real-Time Visual Agents in League of Legends (2026)
- Learning User Representations to Improve Simulation Fidelity (2026)
- RoboJudge: Multimodal Language Models as Judges for Embodied Video Generation (2026)
- CUEing User Simulators: Calibrated User Embeddings for Multi-Turn Benchmarking (2026)
Please give a thumbs up to this comment if you found it helpful!
If you want recommendations for any Paper on Hugging Face checkout this Space
You can directly ask Librarian Bot for paper recommendations by tagging it in a comment: @librarian-bot recommend
Get this paper in your agent:
hf papers read 2611.08286 Don't have the latest CLI?
curl -LsSf https://hf.co/cli/install.sh | bash Models citing this paper 0
No model linking this paper
Datasets citing this paper 0
No dataset linking this paper
Spaces citing this paper 0
No Space linking this paper
Collections including this paper 0
No Collection including this paper