# Thinking in Structures: Evaluating Spatial Intelligence in Constraint-Governed Spaces

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2602.07864 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.07864/

## Key facts

- Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Spatial and embodied reasoning, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning.
- Builds on 15 of its 52 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 8 Feb 2026.

## Placed in

- LLM reasoning / [Spatial and embodied reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/lr/spatial-and-embodied-reasoning/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 15 of 15)

- [MMSI-Bench: A Benchmark for Multi-Image Spatial Intelligence](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.23764/) (2025)
- [From Flatland to Space: Teaching Vision-Language Models to Perceive and Reason in 3D](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.22976/) (2025)
- [ViewSpatial-Bench: Evaluating Multi-perspective Spatial Localization in Vision-Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.21500/) (2025)
- [OmniSpatial: Towards Comprehensive Spatial Reasoning Benchmark for Vision Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.03135/) (2025)
- [STI-Bench: Are MLLMs Ready for Precise Spatial-Temporal World Understanding?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.23765/) (2025)
- [Multi-SpatialMLLM: Multi-Frame Spatial Understanding with Multi-Modal Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.17015/) (2025)
- [A Survey of State of the Art Large Vision Language Models: Alignment, Benchmark, Evaluations and Challenges](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.02189/) (2025)
- [MMSI-Video-Bench: A Holistic Benchmark for Video-Based Spatial Intelligence](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2512.10863/) (2025)
- [OST-Bench: Evaluating the Capabilities of MLLMs in Online Spatio-temporal Scene Understanding](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.07984/) (2025)
- [EgoExoBench: A Benchmark for First- and Third-person View Video Understanding in MLLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.18342/) (2025)
- [DSI-Bench: A Benchmark for Dynamic Spatial Intelligence](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.18873/) (2025)
- [Seeing from Another Perspective: Evaluating Multi-View Understanding in MLLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.15280/) (2025)
- [CVBench: Benchmarking Cross-Video Synergies for Complex Multimodal Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2508.19542/) (2025)
- [ENACT: Evaluating Embodied Cognition with World Modeling of Egocentric Interaction](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2511.20937/) (2025)
- [InteractComp: Evaluating Search Agents With Ambiguous Queries](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.24668/) (2025)

## Built on by (most cited first, 3 of 3)

- [WildRoadBench: A Wild Aerial Road-Damage Grounding Benchmark for Vision-Language Models and Autonomous Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.20306/) (2026)
- [MindTopo: Can Foundation Models Reason in Topological Space?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.11900/) (2026)
- [Game2Real-Bench: Do Toy Games Reveal and Transfer to Real-World Visual Reasoning?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2610.18834/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Spatial intelligence is crucial for vision--language models (VLMs), yet many scene-centric benchmarks evaluate unconstrained environments where a single image may admit multiple plausible 3D interpretations. We introduce SSI-Bench, a VQA benchmark for Structure-Centric Spatial Reasoning (SCSR) in constraint-governed spaces. Built from complex real-world 3D structures, it uses structural constraints from geometry, topology, and physical feasibility to make component relations more determinate from visual evidence. The benchmark contains 1,000 ranking questions spanning geometric and topological reasoning, where correct ordering requires resolving all candidate-wise 3D relations, imposing stronger demands on spatial understanding. It is created through a fully human-centered pipeline with over 400 researcher-hours of image curation, component annotation, and question design. Evaluating 31 VLMs reveals a large gap to humans: the best open-source model achieves 22.2% accuracy and the strongest closed-source model reaches 33.6%, while humans score 91.6%. Further results show that chain-of-thought reasoning brings only marginal gains, and error analysis reveals fundamental limitations in current models' spatial understanding within constraint-governed spaces. Project page: https://ssi-bench.github.io.