Challenge: Existing benchmarks for multimodal reasoning in large multimodal models are underperforming on multimodal tasks.
Approach: They propose a benchmark for multimodal reasoning in large multimodal models, MM-MATH . MM's process evaluation employs LMM-as-a-judge to automatically analyze solution steps . diagram misinterpretation is the most common error, they find .
Outcome: The proposed model achieves only 31% accuracy, compared to 82% for humans.

Similar Papers

A Survey of Multimodal Mathematical Reasoning: From Perception, Alignment to Reasoning (2026.acl-long)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Multimodal mathematical Reasoning (MMR) has attracted increasing attention for its ability to solve mathematical problems involving both textual and visual modalities.
Approach: They review the theoretical frameworks of multimodal reasoning and examine the challenges they face in visual math tasks.
Outcome: The proposed models can solve problems involving both textual and visual modalities.
We-Math: Does Your Large Multimodal Model Achieve Human-like Mathematical Reasoning? (2025.acl-long)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Existing benchmarks focus more on end-to-end performance, but neglect the underlying principles of knowledge acquisition and generalization.
Approach: They propose a benchmark specifically designed to explore the problem-solving principles by decomposing 6.5K visual math problems into 10.9K step-level questions for evaluation.
Outcome: The proposed benchmark covers 6.5K visual math problems and 10.9K step-level questions spanning 5 layers of knowledge granularity and 67 hierarchical knowledge concepts.
MultiSkill: Evaluating Large Multimodal Models for Fine-grained Alignment Skills (2024.findings-emnlp)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Existing evaluation settings for large multimodal models focus on coarse-grained evaluation without considering skill composition required by specific instructions.
Approach: They propose an evaluation protocol that assesses large multimodal models across multiple fine-grained skills for alignment with human values.
Outcome: The proposed evaluation protocol decomposes coarse-level scoring to fine-grained skill set-level score tailored to each instruction.
MMEvalPro: Calibrating Multimodal Benchmarks Towards Trustworthy and Efficient Evaluation (2025.naacl-long)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Large Multimodal Models (LMMs) exhibit impressive cross-modal understanding and reasoning abilities, but many benchmarks suffer from systematic biases.
Approach: They propose a benchmark to avoid Type-I errors by creating one perception question and one knowledge anchor question through a meticulous annotation process.
Outcome: The proposed benchmark avoids Type-I errors while maintaining reliability of MCQ evaluations.
MMTutorBench: The First Multimodal Benchmark for AI Math Tutoring (2026.acl-long)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Existing benchmarks for AI math tutoring largely overlook these skills.
Approach: They evaluate 12 leading multimodal large language models and find clear performance gaps between them.
Outcome: The proposed benchmarks show that they can solve 770 problems and provide diagnostics and guidance to students step by step.
MM-CRITIC: A Holistic Evaluation of Large Multimodal Models as Multimodal Critique (2025.findings-emnlp)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: e MM-CRITIC is a holistic benchmark for evaluating the critique ability of Large Multimodal Models (LMMs) covering 8 main task types and over 500 tasks, covering 4471 samples.
Approach: They introduce a holistic benchmark for evaluating the critique ability of Large Multimodal Models across multiple dimensions: basic, correction, and comparison.
Outcome: The proposed benchmark covers 8 main task types and over 500 tasks and is composed of 4471 samples.
Multimodal Inconsistency Reasoning (MMIR): A New Benchmark for Multimodal Reasoning Models (2025.findings-acl)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Existing Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) are predominantly trained on consistent visual-textual inputs, leaving open the question of whether they can handle semantic mismatches in layout-rich content.
Approach: They propose to use multimodal inconsistency reasoning to assess MLLMs' ability to reason about semantic mismatches in webpages, presentation slides, and posters.
Outcome: The proposed model outperforms open-source models in detecting inconsistencies in webpages, presentation slides, and posters while remaining vulnerable to inconsistent errors.
MMTabReal: Real-World Benchmark for Multimodal Table Understanding (2026.findings-acl)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Multimodal tables are ubiquitous in real applications but are difficult to evaluate in multimodal large language models.
Approach: They propose a multimodal table benchmark that compares 500 real-world tables with 4021 question–answer pairs.
Outcome: MMtabReal spans four question types, five reasoning categories, and eight structural archetypes.
MMRefine: Unveiling the Obstacles to Robust Refinement in Multimodal Large Language Models (2025.findings-acl)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Recent advances have enabled MLLMs to tackle complex challenges such as mathematical reasoning and multimodal understanding.
Approach: They propose a multimodal refinement benchmark to evaluate the refinement capabilities of Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) the benchmark categorizes errors into six error types to highlight areas for improvement in effective reasoning enhancement.
Outcome: The proposed framework evaluates the refinement capabilities of multimodal large language models across six scenarios.
Benchmarking Fine-Grained Error Detection in Multimodal Reasoning (2026.acl-long)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Multimodal Process Reward Models (MPRMs) have emerged as a pivotal framework for enhancing the reasoning capabilities of Multimodal Large Language Models.
Approach: They propose a benchmark specifically designed to evaluate MPRMs’ proficiency in detecting erroneous reasoning steps across diverse error categories.
Outcome: The proposed model achieves up to 4.8% performance improvement through test-time scaling.

What is GenGO?

GenGO is an NLP powered publication search system. It currenctly indexes 30k+ papers from ACL Anthology, and implements multi-aspect summarization, semantic search, and more!

Information

About
Limitations