A Cognitively Motivated Multidimensional Framework for Evaluating Metaphor Explanations

Metaphor enables the understanding of abstract concepts through cross-domain mappings while conveying affective attitudes. In multimodal scenarios, visual and textual information jointly construct Target--Source mappings, requiring both conceptual understanding and cross-modal reasoning. However, existing benchmarks mainly evaluate metaphor understanding through isolated subtasks and lack evidence-grounded explanations, making it difficult to assess whether models establish mappings grounded in visual and textual cues.To address these limitations, we introduce M$^3$R-Bench, a unified and evidence-grounded benchmark containing 1,000 image--text instances with human-verified annotations. Guided by Conceptual Metaphor Theory and theories of nonliteral language understanding, M$^3$R-Bench provides joint annotations for metaphor occurrence, Target--Source mapping, sentiment, and stage-wise explanations following ``evidence identification--mapping establishment--sentiment inference.''Evaluations on M$^3$R-Bench reveal that existing models often overlook visual evidence, rely on superficial textual cues, and produce inaccurate Target--Source mappings, exposing a cross-modal evidence--mapping mismatch. To address this mismatch, we propose M$^3$R-Reasoner, which combines curriculum-based reasoning supervision with task-aware reinforcement learning to align model reasoning with metaphor interpretation. Experiments show that, with only an 8B-parameter backbone, M$^3$R-Reasoner outperforms larger proprietary MLLMs across four unified-task metrics and improves Visual Evidence and Sentiment Justification scores over GPT-5.5 by 28.45 and 30.11 points, respectively, while surpassing Claude-Sonnet-4.6 by 8.00 points in mean rubric score. The dataset and code are available at https://github.com/hongshi4/M3R-Bench.

In this paper, we employ the Minimal Cognitive Grid (MCG), a framework created to evaluate the cognitive plausibility of artificial systems, to offer a systematic assessment of leading computational models of analogy and metaphor, including the Structure-Mapping Engine (SME), CogSketch, METCL, and Large Language Models (LLMs). We present a formal and quantitative operationalization of the MCG framework and, through the analysis of its three main dimensions (Functional/Structural Ratio, Generality, and Performance Match), examine how well each system aligns with standard cognitive theories of the modeled phenomena, thus allowing for comparison of the models with respect to their cognitive plausibility, according to consistent and generalizable mathematical criteria.

Analogical reasoning involves identifying and preserving relational structures across domains. However, existing approaches to AI-driven multimodal analogy generation lack an interpretable measure of whether this structure is understood and maintained in the generated output. We address this gap with Pullback Refinement via Interpretable Structural Mapping (PRISM), a modality-agnostic framework for measuring and improving relational alignment in multimodal analogies, evaluated on visual metaphor generation. PRISM represents analogies as explicit relational mappings grounded in category theory and uses VLMs to instantiate these structures across modalities. Its first component, the pullback score, quantifies relational alignment from the resulting graph representation. On the AnaloBench benchmark, selecting the correct analogy purely by pullback score achieves 82.5% accuracy, demonstrating that the score captures meaningful relational information. PRISM's second component is an iterative refinement loop that uses the pullback score as an in-context feedback signal to iteratively revise the generated image towards greater relational depth. VLM-as-a-judge and human evaluations show that PRISM consistently improves metaphor consistency and analogy appropriateness over zero- shot generation, with human participants preferring the refined output in 57.65% of pairwise comparisons. However, a qualitative analysis reveals that refinement can favour visually crowded compositions rather than genuinely deeper relational correspondences.