GeoHeight-Bench: Towards Height-Aware Multimodal Reasoning in Remote Sensing

Multimodal large language models (MLLMs) have advanced rapidly in remote-sensing analysis, yet existing evaluations remain predominantly 2D-centric. Because spectrally confused regions can appear nearly identical yet differ substantially in vertical structure, appearance alone is often insufficient for reliable semantic interpretation in natural scenes. Vertical structure therefore provides decision-critical physical evidence, yet whether current MLLMs can effectively perceive, ground, and utilize such geometric evidence remains underexplored. To bridge this gap, we introduce VertiCue-Bench, the first diagnostic benchmark that uses controlled interventions to probe whether vertical height evidence is actually perceived, grounded, and utilized, and we establish a three-stage evidence-utilization framework of Perception--Grounding--Utilization. By constructing a Representation Intervention Spectrum spanning multiple presentation and interaction modalities, including Raw Visual, Tool-assisted, and Oracle Text conditions, together with controlled counterfactual tests, we conduct an in-depth disentangled diagnosis across 10 state-of-the-art models. Our experiments reveal and formally characterize the Vertical Structure Utilization Gap. Although current models exhibit emerging geometric perception capabilities, they still struggle to accurately ground vertical evidence to relevant spatial entities and integrate it into high-level semantic decisions. This finding identifies a critical bottleneck in developing physically grounded and geometry-aware remote-sensing MLLMs.

Beyond perception, reasoning is essential in remote sensing for advanced interpretation, inference, and decision-making. Recent advances in large language models (LLMs) have enabled tool-augmented agents that leverage external tools to perform complex analytical tasks. However, existing studies in remote sensing primarily focus on perception-oriented tasks, leaving cognitive geospatial reasoning largely underexplored. To address this gap, we introduce TerraLogic, a benchmark for geospatial reasoning. TerraLogic comprises 545 scenario-driven, hierarchy-aware tasks, such as hazard vulnerability assessment, urban heat island analysis, and forest fragmentation dynamics, spanning optical, Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR), and infrared (IR) imagery. It advances evaluation beyond recognition and monitoring toward cognitive-level geospatial analysis. To facilitate evaluation on TerraLogic, we further propose HieraPlan, a tool-augmented agent that organizes toolkits into functional hierarchies and performs fault-tolerant reasoning. HieraPlan enables structured abstraction, robust recovery from tool failures, and stable long-horizon planning. Extensive experiments demonstrate that current approaches struggle with hierarchical geospatial reasoning, while HieraPlan provides a strong baseline with improved reasoning, cross-modal generalization, and error handling. The dataset and agent code are publicly available at https://github.com/Ireliya/TerraLogic.

Geoscience intelligence is expected to understand, reason about, and predict earth system changes to support human decision-making in critical domains such as disaster response, climate adaptation and environmental protection. Although current research has shown promising progress on specific geoscience tasks, such as remote sensing interpretation, geographic question-answering, existing benchmarks remain largely task-specific which failing to capture the open-ended real world geoscience problems. As a result, it remains unclear how far current AI systems are from achieving genuine geoscience intelligence. To address this gap, we present \textbf{GeoR-Bench}, a \underline{Bench}mark for evaluating \underline{Geo}science visual \underline{R}easoning through reasoning informed visual editing tasks. GeoR-Bench contains 440 curated samples spanning 6 geoscience categories and 24 task types, covering earth observation imagery and structured scientific representations such as maps and diagrams. We evaluate outputs along three dimensions, including reasoning, consistency, and quality. Benchmark results of 21 closed- and open-source multimodal models reveal that geoscience reasoning remains a critical bottleneck. The highest-performing model achieves 42.7% overall strict accuracy, while the best open-source models only get 10.3%. Notably, the visual consistency and image quality of the outputs frequently surpass their scientific accuracy. Ultimately, these findings indicate that current models generate superficially plausible results but fail to capture underlying earth science processes.