We study whether multimodal large language models (MLLMs) can leverage crystallographic plane indices (Miller indices) as a structured latent representation for reasoning about fracture geometry. We formulate Miller indices z=(h,k,l) as a latent variable governing idealized planar fracture and evaluate two complementary capabilities: (i) latent inference, where the model maps visual observations to plane hypotheses under physically valid conditions, and (ii) latent applicability assessment, where the model determines whether such a representation is meaningful for a given fracture image. Through extensive experiments spanning synthetic data, controlled 2D--3D geometric pairs, and real-world fracture images across multiple material classes -- including ceramics, glass, metals, and concrete -- we show that MLLMs can reliably perform latent inference in idealized settings and, critically, can reject the latent representation when the underlying physics does not support it. As an exploratory extension, we further examine AI-generated fracture sequences and observe qualitatively plausible brittle-fracture progression behaviors, suggesting that multimodal generative models may encode partial implicit physical priors related to material failure dynamics. These results suggest that MLLMs can act as physics-aware reasoning systems conditioned on structured latent priors, provided that the domain of validity is explicitly modeled.
Miller-index identification from powder XRD patterns requires capabilities untested by existing multimodal benchmarks: the model must read a narrow peak location from a rendered scientific curve and then connect that observation to multi-step crystallographic reasoning. We introduce CrystalXRD-Bench, a 250-sample benchmark built from 10 public crystallographic databases for a single task: recover the full set of HKLs contributing to the highest-intensity peak in an XRD pattern. Each sample pairs the rendered XRD image with the source CIF text and chemical formula, so visual extraction errors and reasoning errors can be examined side by side. We evaluate seven vision-language models. The best Jaccard score is 0.5888 (GPT-5.4) with an exact-match rate of 37.6%, yet six of seven models remain below Jaccard 0.50; the task is far from solved. Error patterns vary systematically: double-peak cases are especially brittle, recall-heavy models gain coverage by over-predicting HKLs, and access to CIF text does not close the gap in crystallographic calculation. Alongside model rankings, the benchmark identifies the conditions under which current VLMs fail on quantitative scientific figures. All data and evaluation code will be publicly available.
Multimodal evaluations cannot say whether a vision-language model misread an image or misreasoned about it, because every existing method for separating the two places a second model in the loop. We introduce the render ceiling, a model-free reference for benchmarks built by rendering known objects: inverting the frozen cameras and re-solving cross-view correspondence recovers exactly the answer the images support. We prove the ceiling fails only through an enumerable set of projection coincidences and certify that set empty on 2,160 rendered crystal structures, so every point of a model's deficit belongs to the model. Across fourteen vision-language models, supplying exact geometry as text lifts every model yet closes under half the gap for thirteen, while a supervised vision model with no language component reads the same images at 0.8952, above every vision-language model. The instrument exposes extraction-stage fabrication that downstream accuracy would misattribute to reasoning, yields camera-placement rules for benchmark builders, and transfers to any benchmark with an invertible forward rendering.
Current multimodal models handle static image recognition well, but intuitive physical reasoning remains a weakness. Predicting how objects will move and interact from a single image is still difficult for these systems. We present BilliardPhys-Bench, a benchmark for physical reasoning in synthetic billiards environments. Its procedural engine generates randomized scenarios with friction and elastic collisions. The benchmark tests three abilities: (1) predicting ball-to-ball collisions, (2) reasoning about wall bounces, and (3) estimating final ball positions after motion stops. We evaluate recent MLLMs from the GPT, Claude, Gemini, and Qwen families. Performance drops as simulation time increases and scene geometry grows more complex. We also observe a consistent failure mode we call "stasis bias": when the correct physical outcome is harder to infer, models tend to predict no interaction. These findings show where current MLLMs break down on visual dynamics and point toward the need for better physical inductive biases in multimodal architectures.