Beyond RGB: Benchmarking and Enhancing MLLMs for Hyperspectral Image Understanding via Training-Free Reasoning Framework
Organizations: Sun Yat-sen University · Tsinghua Shenzhen International Graduate School · Southwest University · National Supercomputing Center in Shenzhen · China Agricultural University · Southwest Jiaotong University
Abstract
Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) have achieved strong performance on RGB image understanding, yet their ability to use spectral evidence beyond the visible range remains largely unexplored. Hyperspectral imagery (HSI) provides dense spectral measurements that reveal material and environmental cues unavailable in RGB, but current MLLMs cannot directly ingest high-dimensional HSI. To study this gap, we introduce HM-Bench, an evidence-grounded benchmark for hyperspectral image understanding with MLLMs. HM-Bench contains 19,337 question--answer pairs from 2,178 hyperspectral samples across 13 task categories, covering general perception, spectral reasoning, and spatial--spectral reasoning. To make HSI accessible to the native image--text interfaces of existing MLLMs, we further propose VSR$^{2}, a training-free Visual--Spectral--Report Reasoning framework. VSR^{2} represents each HSI sample with three aligned views: an RGB image for visual semantics and spatial context, a PCA-based image for dominant spectral variation, and a structured report for quantitative spectral--spatial evidence. Under a controlled RGB-only versus VSR^{2} evaluation protocol, experiments on 17 representative MLLMs show that HSI information improves average accuracy from 38.26% to 40.35%, with gains varying substantially across models and task categories. These results indicate that HSI information (beyond RGB) is useful for current MLLMs, while robust hyperspectral reasoning remains an open challenge.
Figures & tables
| Benchmark | Input Modality | QA | Tasks | BR-Eval | TF-Enh |
| MMBench ( Liu et al. 2024b ) | RGB | 3k | 20 | ✗ | ✗ |
| VRSBench ( Li, Ding, and Elhoseiny 2024 ) | RGB | 12.3k | 10 | ✗ | ✗ |
| AgroBench ( Shinoda et al. 2025 ) | RGB | 4.3k | 7 | ✗ | ✗ |
| AgroMind ( Li et al. 2025 ) | RGB | 28k | 13 | ✗ | ✗ |
| XLRS-Bench ( Wang et al. 2025c ) | RGB | 32k | 16 | ✗ | ✗ |
| RSHR-Bench ( Dang et al. 2025 ) | RGB | 8.2k | 13 | ✗ | ✗ |
| Model | Report | PCA | RGB | w/o PCA | w/o Report | VSR 2 |
| Random | 25.13 | 25.13 | 25.13 | 25.13 | 25.13 | 25.13 |
| Closed-source Models | ||||||
| Claude-Sonnet-4-6 ( Anthropic, P.B.C. 2026 ) | 36.57 | 39.48 | 40.95 | 39.65 | 43.11 | 44.01 |
| GPT-5.4-Mini ( OpenAI 2026 ) | 37.45 | 42.35 | 39.88 | 40.58 | 43.70 | 44.28 |
| Grok-4 ( de Carvalho Souza and Weigang 2025 ) | 31.68 | 32.78 | 34.67 | 38.70 | 43.74 | 39.50 |
| Open-source Models | ||||||
Appendix figures & tables23 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
| Dataset | Sensor | Resolution | Bands | Wavelength | QAs | Patch Size | Scene Type |
| IndianPines ( Baumgardner, Biehl, and Landgrebe 2015 ) | AVIRIS | 20m | 200 | 0.4 – 2.5 m | 450 | 40 40 | Agriculture/Nature |
| Salinas ( Hou et al. 2021a ) | AVIRIS | 3.7m | 204 | 0.4 – 2.5 m | 1,080 | 64 64 | Agriculture |
| Xiongan ( Yi et al. 2020 ) | VNIR Imaging Spectrometer (SITP) | 0.5m | 250 | 0.4 – 1 m | 3,003 | 256 256 | Agriculture |
| Houston 2013 ( Debes et al. 2014 ) | CASI-1500 | 2.5m | 144 | 0.364 – 1.046 m | 501 | 100 100 | Urban/Nature |
| Houston 2018 ( Xu et al. 2019 ) | CASI-1500 | 2.5m | 144 | 0.374 – 1.047 m | 501 | 100 100 | Urban/Nature |
| WashingtonDC ( Purdue Research Foundation 1996 ) | HYDICE | — | 191 | 0.4 – 2.4 m | 612 | 48 48 | Urban/Nature |
| Category | Definition | Rejected QA candidate | Reason for rejection |
| Hallucination | The MLLM generates surface-plausible content that cannot be supported by the available hyperspectral evidence. | Task: Vegetation Health/Stress Diagnosis Question: Based on the spectral characteristics of the vegetation in this block, what is the estimated chlorophyll content? Options: A. Low (SPAD 20) B. Moderate (SPAD 30–40) C. High (SPAD 45) D. Extremely high (SPAD 60) Answer: C | The question requests a quantitative chlorophyll estimate, but the available spectral-spatial evidence does not provide sufficient calibration information for biochemical retrieval. The MLLM incorrectly associates vegetation appearance with a specific physiological parameter and produces a seemingly plausible but unsupported quantitative claim. |
| Triviality | The QA pair is correctly formatted but provides limited evaluation value because the answer can be obtained from overly obvious visual cues without requiring meaningful spectral-spatial analysis. | Task: Presence Detection Question: Does vegetation exist in this image patch? Options: A. Yes B. No Answer: A | The image patch is almost entirely occupied by visually dominant vegetation, making the answer directly observable from RGB appearance or simple visual inspection. Although the QA pair is valid, it does not require hyperspectral evidence or non-visible spectral information, resulting in limited capability discrimination. |
| Format Issue | The generated content may be semantically meaningful but violates the predefined QA schema or evaluation protocol. | Task: Spectral Unmixing Question: Based on the spectral characteristics of pixel, which endmember combination is most likely? Options: A. Concrete and Asphalt … D. Healthy vegetation and Concrete Answer: The pixel contains mixed vegetation and impervious surface signals due to transitional spectral responses. | The benchmark requires the answer to be represented only by the option index (e.g., “B”). The generated response contains additional free-form explanation, which violates the predefined answer format and prevents automatic evaluation. |
| Dataset | #Bands | EV@1 | EV@3 | EV@6 | EV@12 | EV@24 | #PCs for 95% EV |
| BayArea_2013 ( Cooper et al. 2020 ) | 224 | 82.52 | 99.81 | 99.96 | 99.99 | 99.99 | 2 |
| BayArea_2015 ( Cooper et al. 2020 ) | 224 | 54.10 | 99.44 | 99.81 | 99.93 | 99.96 | 2 |
| Botswana ( Hou et al. 2021a ) | 145 | 94.62 | 99.40 | 99.67 | 99.78 | 99.87 | 2 |
| HanChuan ( Zhong et al. 2020 ) | 274 | 92.21 | 99.45 | 99.67 | 99.74 | 99.81 | 2 |
| Hermiston_2004 ( Hou et al. 2021b ) | 242 | 76.77 | 93.59 | 96.67 | 97.99 | 98.97 | 4 |
| Hermiston_2007 ( Hou et al. 2021b ) | 242 | 73.11 | 90.17 | 95.29 | 97.19 | 98.56 | 6 |
| Model | Input Mod. | # PCs | ||
| 6 | 12 | 24 | ||
| Qwen3-VL-4B | PCA-only | 39.57 | 40.96 | 40.34 |
| w/o Report | 39.23 | 42.97 | 42.63 | |
| VSR² | 40.47 | 43.23 | 41.98 | |
| InternVL3.5 | PCA-only | 37.08 | 43.08 | 38.10 |
| w/o Report | 42.91 | 43.80 | 41.72 | |
| Model | Report | PCA | RGB | w/o PCA | w/o Report | VSR 2 |
| Random | 25.13 | 25.13 | 25.13 | 25.13 | 25.13 | 25.13 |
| Closed-source Models | ||||||
| Claude-Sonnet-4-6 ( Anthropic, P.B.C. 2026 ) | 36.57 | 39.48 | 40.95 | 39.65 | 43.11 | 44.01 |
| GPT-5.4-Mini ( OpenAI 2026 ) | 37.45 | 42.35 | 39.88 | 40.58 | 43.70 | 44.28 |
| Grok-4 ( de Carvalho Souza and Weigang 2025 ) | 31.68 | 32.78 | 34.67 | 38.70 | 43.74 | 39.50 |
| Open-source Models | ||||||
| Model | Input | FR | TQ | SL | CI | SE | CD | |||||||
| SFR | LCC | PD | Count | OLR | RD | SAD | SU | VHS | EPS | BCI | CAL | CSA | ||
| Claude-Sonnet-4.6 | Report-only | 41.54 | 23.39 | 39.80 | 34.57 | 30.38 | 47.30 | 39.58 | 39.62 | 48.58 | 45.37 | 30.36 | 21.60 | 33.33 |
| PCA-only | 58.20 | 42.17 | 50.07 | 26.73 | 29.02 | 43.77 | 32.05 | 42.65 | 49.26 | 56.48 | 38.08 | 14.80 | 30.00 | |
| RGB-only | 48.67 | 29.59 | 56.26 | 24.70 | 31.64 | 42.43 | 32.36 | 41.83 | 46.32 | 53.01 | 36.35 | 12.41 | 30.05 | |
| GPT-5.4-Mini | Report-only | 39.60 | 19.77 | 32.96 | 39.05 | 27.24 | 43.77 | 60.27 | 37.32 | 47.85 | 44.52 | 31.96 | 20.41 | 29.17 |
| PCA-only | 50.60 | 35.48 | 46.06 | 32.05 | 28.55 | 42.00 | 64.18 | 47.30 | 41.79 | 51.31 | 35.55 | 12.41 | 35.00 | |