aiqbench analysis
PainterBench introduces a novel benchmark for evaluating figural divergent thinking in multimodal agents, specifically testing their ability to creatively complete incomplete drawings using tool calls. The study reveals significant variations in creative capabilities across 14 models, noting that while frontier models like GPT-6 Astra achieve high creativity scores, agent-generated art currently lags behind human work in recognizability. This research advances the field by providing a rigorous framework for assessing incremental visual planning and the transfer of pretraining creativity to agentic workflows.
PainterBench: A Figural Divergent-Thinking Benchmark for Tool-Using Language Models
arXiv:2609.34195v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Figural divergent thinking is the ability to develop a given shape fragment into an original drawing. In humans, this ability is assessed with incomplete-drawing tasks. We introduce PainterBench, a benchmark that ports the incomplete-drawing task to the agentic setting. The agent draws on a canvas through tool calls and observes the result after every turn. The canvas includes a starting shape which cannot be erased, and the agent's goal is to incorporate this shape into the most original drawing it can produce. The task is open-ended, and the agent itself decides when the drawing is finished. The benchmark tests incremental visual planning over a short horizon and the transfer of creative ability from pretraining to multi-turn tool use. We evaluate 14 multimodal language models from small to frontier scale. Across the primary study and six sensitivity analyses, we collect 2,700 drawings and crowdsource creativity and recognizability ratings for every drawing and for 300 human reference drawings. We also present ViDrA-adapted, an automated scorer that predicts human creativity ratings of agent drawings (r = 0.85 on random held-out test split). Figural divergent thinking varies widely across the 14 models, and GPT-6 Astra produces the most creative drawings. Relative to the human drawings, the agent drawings score higher in creativity but lower in recognizability. We release the final drawings, per-round canvas snapshots, tool call traces, stimulus bank, benchmark harness, crowdsourced ratings (N = 72,000), and ViDrA checkpoint.
Abstract:Figural divergent thinking is the ability to develop a given shape fragment into an original drawing. In humans, this ability is assessed with incomplete-drawing tasks. We introduce PainterBench, a benchmark that ports the incomplete-drawing task to the agentic setting. The agent draws on a canvas through tool calls and observes the result after every turn. The canvas includes a starting shape which cannot be erased, and the agent's goal is to incorporate this shape into the most original drawing it can produce. The task is open-ended, and the agent itself decides when the drawing is finished. The benchmark tests incremental visual planning over a short horizon and the transfer of creative ability from pretraining to multi-turn tool use. We evaluate 14 multimodal language models from small to frontier scale. Across the primary study and six sensitivity analyses, we collect 2,700 drawings and crowdsource creativity and recognizability ratings for every drawing and for 300 human reference drawings. We also present ViDrA-adapted, an automated scorer that predicts human creativity ratings of agent drawings (r = 0.85 on random held-out test split). Figural divergent thinking varies widely across the 14 models, and GPT-6 Astra produces the most creative drawings. Relative to the human drawings, the agent drawings score higher in creativity but lower in recognizability. We release the final drawings, per-round canvas snapshots, tool call traces, stimulus bank, benchmark harness, crowdsourced ratings (N = 72,000), and ViDrA checkpoint.
Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Computation and Language (cs.CL); Human-Computer Interaction (cs.HC)
arXiv:2609.34195 [cs.AI]
(or arXiv:2609.34195v1 [cs.AI] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.34195 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Full text under the publisher's open licence · 336 words
Related coverage
Links #5: 2026/07
LessWrong · Jul 31, 2026
Untrusted advice for AI control: Short, strong advice significantly uplifts weak LLMs
LessWrong · Jul 27, 2026

Runway’s WorldPrompt and the Engineering of Real-Time Worlds
Latent Space · Sep 25, 2026

Frontier post-training recipe review with Finbarr Timbers
Interconnects · Jun 16, 2026