Phi-4-reasoning-vision-15B Technical Report
Organizations: Microsoft Research
Abstract
We present Phi-4-reasoning-vision-15B, a compact open-weight multimodal reasoning model, and share the motivations, design choices, experiments, and learnings that informed its development. Our goal is to contribute practical insight to the research community on building smaller, efficient multimodal reasoning models and to share the result of these learnings as an open-weight model that is good at common vision and language tasks and excels at scientific and mathematical reasoning and understanding user interfaces. Our contributions include demonstrating that careful architecture choices and rigorous data curation enable smaller, open-weight multimodal models to achieve competitive performance with significantly less training and inference-time compute and tokens. The most substantial improvements come from systematic filtering, error correction, and synthetic augmentation -- reinforcing that data quality remains the primary lever for model performance. Systematic ablations show that high-resolution, dynamic-resolution encoders yield consistent improvements, as accurate perception is a prerequisite for high-quality reasoning. Finally, a hybrid mix of reasoning and non-reasoning data with explicit mode tokens allows a single model to deliver fast direct answers for simpler tasks and chain-of-thought reasoning for complex problems.
Figures & tables
| Method | Max Tokens | MathVista | ScreenSpot | ScreenSpot-Pro | V*Bench |
| Dynamic-S 2 | 3096 | 42.9 | 78.4 | 9.4 | 52.9 |
| Multi-crop | 3096 | 43.4 | 67.8 | 5.4 | 51.8 |
| Multi-crop with S 2 | 2048 | 43.4 | 79.1 | 10.6 | 57.1 |
| Dynamic resolution | 2048 | 45.2 | 81.5 | 9.2 | 51.3 |
| Dynamic resolution | 3600 | 44.9 | 79.7 | 17.5 | 56.0 |
| Stage | MLP | Vision Encoder | LLM | Data |
| 1. MLP Pretraining | ✓ | × | × | Image–text alignment |
| 2. Instruction Tuning | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Single-image instruction tuning |
| 3. Long Context & RAI | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Long content, multi-image, RAI |
| Hyperparameter | Stage 1 | Stage 2 | Stage 3 |
| Learning rate | |||
| LR schedule | Cosine | Cosine w/ min LR | Cosine w/ min LR |
| Min LR ratio | – | 0.1 | 0.1 |
| Warmup | 3% of steps | 500 steps | 500 steps |
| Weight decay | 0 | ||
| Adam | (0.9, 0.999) | (0.9, 0.95) | (0.9, 0.95) |
| General | Math | CUA | Total | MMMU-CoT | MathVista | ScreenSpot-V2 |
| 1M | 150K | 450K | 1.6M | 44.0 | 37.4 | 48.2 |
| 1M | 150K | 850K | 2.0M | 44.1 | 37.3 | 60.0 |
| 1M | 450K | 450K | 1.9M | 45.3 | 36.0 | 48.3 |
| 1M | 450K | 850K | 2.3M | 43.4 | 38.9 | 63.1 |
| 1M | 150K | 150K | 1.3M | 44.2 | 36.9 | 29.8 |
| 1M | 150K | 250K | 1.4M | 45.4 | 37.4 | 37.7 |
| Benchmark | Phi-4-reasoning-vision-15B | Phi-4- reasoning- vision-15B –force nothink | Phi-4- mm- instruct | Kimi-VL- A3B- Instruct | gemma- 3- 12b-it | Qwen3- VL-8B- Instruct -4K | Qwen3- VL-8B- Instruct -32K | Qwen3- VL-32B- Instruct -4K | Qwen3- VL-32B- Instruct -32K |
| AI2D TEST | 84.8 | 84.7 | 68.6 | 84.6 | 80.4 | 82.7 | 83 | 84.8 | 85 |
| ChartQA TEST | 83.3 | 76.5 | 23.5 | 87 | 39 | 83.1 | 83.2 | 84.3 | 84 |
| HallusionBench | 64.4 | 63.1 | 56 | 65.2 | 65.3 | 73.5 | 74.1 | 74.4 | 74.9 |
| MathVerse MINI | 44.9 | 43.8 | 32.4 | 41.7 | 29.8 | 54.5 | 57.4 | 64.2 | 64.2 |
| MathVision MINI | 36.2 | 34.2 | 20 | 28.3 | 31.9 | 45.7 | 50 | 54.3 | 60.5 |
| MathVista MINI | 75.2 | 68.7 | 50.5 | 67.1 | 57.4 | 77.1 | 76.4 | 82.5 | 81.8 |
| Benchmark | Phi-4-reasoning-vision-15B | Phi-4- reasoning- vision-15B –force thinking | Kimi-VL- A3B- Thinking | gemma- 3-12b-it | Qwen3- VL-8B- Thinking -4K | Qwen3- VL-8B- Thinking -40K | Qwen3- VL-32B- Thinking -4K | Qwen3- VL-32B- Thinking -40K |
| AI2D TEST | 84.8 | 79.7 | 81.2 | 80.4 | 83.5 | 83.9 | 86.9 | 87.2 |
| ChartQA TEST | 83.3 | 82.9 | 73.3 | 39 | 78 | 78.6 | 78.5 | 79.1 |
| HallusionBench | 64.4 | 63.9 | 70.6 | 65.3 | 71.6 | 73 | 76.4 | 76.6 |
| MathVerse MINI | 44.9 | 53.1 | 61 | 29.8 | 67.3 | 73.3 | 78.3 | 78.2 |
| MathVision MINI | 36.2 | 36.2 | 50.3 | 31.9 | 43.1 | 50.7 | 60.9 | 58.6 |
| MathVista MINI | 75.2 | 74.1 | 78.6 | 57.4 | 77.7 | 79.5 | 83.9 | 83.8 |
| Evaluation | Description | Defect Rate |
| Text to Text Safety | Automated content safety evaluation measuring safety policies | 1.4% |
| Image to Text Safety | Automated content safety evaluation measuring safety policies | 4.5% |
Appendix figures & tables1 asset
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
| Stage | Category | Datasets |
| Stage 1: MLP Pretraining | Image–Text Alignment | Bunny [ He et al., 2024 ] |
| Stage 2: Single-Image Instruction Tuning | Caption | Bunny [ He et al., 2024 ] Recaptioned, Pixmo [ Deitke et al., 2024 ] , LLaVA-OneVision [ Li et al., 2024a ] |
| Diagram & Chart QA | LLaVA-OneVision [ Li et al., 2024a ] , CoSyn [ Yang et al., 2025 ] | |
| Document QA | Docmatix [ HuggingFaceM4 Team, 2024a ] , LLaVA-OneVision [ Li et al., 2024a ] | |
| Object Detection | Open Images [ Kuznetsova et al., 2020 ] | |
| OCR | LLaVA-OneVision [ Li et al., 2024a ] , IAM [ Marti and Bunke, 2002 ] |
VLM Reasoning
Vision-language model reasoning studies how multimodal systems use visual evidence and language to answer questions, plan, and explain.
See all 853 papers