Multimodal Model Evaluation

Large Language Models (LLMs) have advanced autonomous agents from deep search, which retrieves concise factual answers, to deep research, which synthesizes scattered evidence into long-form reports. However, verifiable multimodal deep research remains challenging due to open-ended synthesis without deterministic ground truth and the need to interleave textual arguments with visual evidence. We propose Ptah, a multi-agent harness for interleaved report generation. Ptah orchestrates the lifecycle from user query to rendered web report through planning, research, and writing stages, where specialized agents construct visual-aware plans, collect claim-grounded evidence, maintain source-aligned images in a Visual Working Memory, and compose reports through declarative multimodal tool use. A verifier agent serves as the harness's acceptance function, enforcing factual grounding, citation fidelity, and cross-modal consistency throughout the workflow. We further introduce PtahEval, an evaluation protocol that augments existing benchmarks with image-level and presentation-level assessments. Experiments on deep research benchmarks show that Ptah produces more reliable, visually informative, and usable human-facing multimodal reports than strong baselines. Our code is released at https://github.com/SnowNation101/Ptah

As multimodal language models play an increasingly important role in scientific research, materials science offers a critical testbed due to its interdisciplinary, multimodal, and application-driven nature. However, existing materials benchmarks mainly focus on property prediction, knowledge QA, or characterization understanding, leaving the broader reasoning process from materials knowledge to application underexplored. To fill this gap, we present OmniMatBench, a human-calibrated multimodal reasoning benchmark for materials science. OmniMatBench contains 3,171 expert-curated QA and calculation problems across 19 materials-science subfields, spanning fundamental materials knowledge, structural and engineering materials, materials processing and manufacturing, and functional and applied materials. We evaluate 13 open-source and closed-source MLLMs and find that the best model achieves only a 0.372 overall score, revealing a substantial gap in current materials-science reasoning. Further analysis shows strong variation across subfields, fixed reasoning heuristics, uneven materials knowledge, and limited high-level knowledge application under formula-, retrieval-, and code-assisted settings. OmniMatBench provides crucial insights into the capabilities and limitations of current MLLMs and establishes a foundation for reliable AI assistants in materials-science research.

Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) have shown strong performance on public medical benchmarks, yet existing evaluations often remain weak proxies for clinical use, relying on isolated inputs and simplified recognition-style tasks. We introduce CardioLens, a leakage-resistant evaluation testbed for multi-sequence Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance (CMR), constructed from private hospital archives through a rigorous report-to-QA construction and verification pipeline. CardioLens contains 473,896 slices and 13,494 verified QA pairs across 4D Cine, LGE, perfusion, and T2-weighted imaging, and evaluates three stages of CMR interpretation: image understanding, report generation, and disease diagnosis. Across 24 state-of-the-art MLLMs, CardioLens reveals a substantial clinical reality gap: models perform poorly overall, with performance degrading along the real CMR workflow. Confusion analysis further shows a category-collapse failure mode, where models default to frequent abnormal categories rather than distinguishing clinically distinct findings. To rule out MLLM-compatible input construction as the primary cause, we compare random, clinically motivated, and data-driven slice selection protocols under different slice budgets; performance changes only marginally, typically by about 1%. Explicit reasoning prompts also fail to rescue performance, often making models more conservative rather than improving visual evidence use. These results show that current MLLMs remain far from reliable CMR interpretation, where clinical decisions require integrating distributed evidence across sequences, views, and temporal phases. CardioLens provides a clinically grounded testbed for developing next-generation MLLMs toward real-world clinical deployment.

While multimodal large language models (MLLMs) have achieved rapid progress in vision-language understanding, they remain prone to multimodal hallucinations, producing responses that are inconsistent with the visual input. Existing benchmarks predominantly focus on detecting hallucination outcomes rather than evaluating the underlying causes of these failures. Moreover, many benchmarks rely on simplistic scenarios and limited evaluation formats that no longer challenge state-of-the-art models. To address these limitations, we introduce ReactBench, a cause-driven hallucination benchmark featuring multiple tasks and an exam-style evaluation format. By generating adversarial images and hallucination-inducing queries, ReactBench introduces four targeted tasks: Relational Erasure, Counterfactual Attribute, Alteration Tracing, and Dense Counting. These tasks systematically expose co-occurrence bias, language priors, cross-image comparative perception deficiencies, and fine-grained perceptual bottlenecks. Beyond standard accuracy-based evaluation, we leverage Chain-of-Thought reasoning to identify fine-grained sub-causes of hallucination within each task. Extensive evaluations reveal that current MLLMs remain notably vulnerable to cause-specific hallucination triggers, demonstrating the value of ReactBench as a systematic and interpretable testbed for diagnosing and improving multimodal model robustness. The project page is available at https://reactbench.github.io/.

The emergence of Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs) has substantially expanded model capabilities beyond text-only understanding, enabling unified inference across both visual and textual modalities and supporting a broader range of real-world applications. To comprehensively evaluate the perception, understanding, reasoning, and cognition capabilities of LVLMs throughout the entire financial business workflow in Chinese contexts, we introduce CFMME, a novel Chinese financial multimodal evaluation benchmark. CFMME comprises 6,052 instances spanning from fundamental academic knowledge to complex real-world applications, covering eight primary financial image modalities and four core multimodal tasks. On CFMME, we conduct a thorough evaluation of representative LVLMs. The results show that the state-of-the-art model attains an overall accuracy of 66.11% on the question answering task and an average score of 77.18 on the detection, recognition, and information extraction tasks, indicating substantial room for improvement in current LVLMs. In addition, we conduct detailed analyses of error causes, cross-modal capabilities, and multi-orientation settings, yielding valuable insights for future research. We hope that CFMME will spur further progress in LVLMs, especially by improving their performance on multiple multimodal tasks in the financial domain.

Visual outcomes are increasingly central to multimodal large language models, making reliable and fine-grained verification essential for scaling generalist foundation models. In this work, we investigate multimodal meta-verification, which leverages verifier-generated rationales rather than decision-only signals, and explore how to effectively incorporate meta-verification feedback into multimodal verifier training. We identify two key findings. First, symbolic verifier outputs (e.g., bounding boxes) outperform textual explanations as meta-verification rationales, enabling efficient rule-based reinforcement learning rewards while avoiding reliance on model-based rewards from auxiliary judge models. Second, decoupling reinforcement learning objectives for binary judgment and meta-verification substantially outperforms joint reward optimization, due to intrinsic differences in output structure and learning dynamics. Based on these insights, we train OmniVerifier-M1, a generalist visual verifier leveraging symbolic meta-verification and decoupled reinforcement learning. OmniVerifier-M1 provides robust verification and fine-grained error localization, and further enables M1-TTS, a verifier-driven agentic generation system achieving dynamic region-level self-correction. This approach paves the way for more reliable, interpretable, and fine-grained multimodal verification, supporting safer and more controllable foundation model deployment.

An Initial Public Offering (IPO) filing is a document released when a private firm goes public, allowing individual (retail) investors to purchase its shares. These filings describe a firm's business, financials, and risks and are long, multimodal documents with narrative text and images. Despite their importance to financial markets, there is no large-scale, standardized dataset or benchmark for studying IPO filings with modern language and multimodal models. These documents pose significant challenges: filings frequently exceed 500,000 tokens and lack consistent structural organization. We introduce the IPO-Toolkit, an open-source framework for downloading and parsing IPO filings into standardized section-structured text and extracted images. The toolkit segments filings, extracts embedded images, and produces structured outputs that enable large-scale, reproducible analysis workflows over long, multimodal documents. Using this infrastructure, we construct the IPO-Dataset, a large, section-structured, multimodal dataset covering more than 109,000 IPO filings and amendments from 1994 to 2026 and containing over 76,000 images. We establish structured evaluation tasks over extracted financial charts, including chart quality and misleadingness assessment. Our experiments show that state-of-the-art multimodal models often diverge from expert human judgments on these tasks, exposing alignment challenges in multimodal reasoning over long, real-world regulatory documents. Beyond benchmarking, the IPO-Dataset enables large-scale analysis of section-level textual variation and cross-industry differences in visual and textual disclosure practices. Our code, dataset, and website are publicly available under CC-BY-4.0.

Text-to-Image generation has evolved from basic image synthesis into a frequently used core capability in professional creative workflows, where simple text-image alignment can no longer satisfy users' pressing demands for faithful real-world reconstruction and genuine creative expression. Existing benchmarks, however, remain anchored in these foundational criteria and do not yet capture the nuanced capabilities that matter in authentic artistic practice, making it difficult to reliably distinguish state-of-the-art T2I models. To address the gap, we introduce Qwen-Image-Bench, a creator-centric benchmark co-designed with professional artists and grounded in real-world creation scenarios. Qwen-Image-Bench enriches conventional evaluation with two application-driven dimensions: Real-world Fidelity and Creative Generation. Drawing on the staged reasoning inherent in professional artistic workflows, we organize these five pillars into a top-down hierarchical taxonomy that further decomposes into 23 second-level sub-capabilities and 56 third-level verifiable rubrics. To ensure broad coverage, we curate 1000 stratified prompts with each prompt jointly exercising more than four fine-grained facets across multiple pillars. We train a unified judge model Q-Judger based on Qwen3.6-27B, supervised by 80 professional annotators from global art academies under blind labeling and triple-review protocols, that scores every image across all 56 verifiable facets, producing fine-grained, rubric-grounded, and fully attributable diagnostics rather than a single opaque score. Empirically, Qwen-Image-Bench reliably distinguishes leading T2I models, achieving the greatest separation on the two application-driven dimensions of Real-world Fidelity and Creative Generation where existing benchmarks provide little insight, while also providing a trustworthy optimization signal for production-level T2I development.

In recent years, Multi-Talker Audio-Video Generation (MTAVG) models have shown promising performance on fundamental metrics such as lip-sync and audio-visual alignment. However, these metrics remain insufficient for assessing cinematic expressiveness in scene-level generation. In multi-character scenes, generation models must go beyond audio-visual realism to convey coherent character performance and other higher-level cinematic qualities. To fill this gap, we introduce MTAVG-Bench 2.0, a benchmark for diagnosing failure modes of cinematic expressiveness in multi-talker audio-video generation. Unlike prior settings that mainly focus on the quality of basic multi-turn dialogue, MTAVG-Bench 2.0 targets short-drama and scene-level generation, and establishes a high-level failure taxonomy spanning acting, narrative, atmosphere, and audio-visual language. Based on this taxonomy, we construct more than 10,000 question-answering evaluation instances, together with subsets for short-drama-level assessment and temporal localization of failure modes, to systematically evaluate the ability of omni large language models to diagnose high-level audio-visual failures. Experimental results show that commercial omni models such as Gemini substantially outperform other evaluators, yet even the strongest models continue to struggle with complex failures in our benchmark. These results demonstrate that MTAVG-Bench 2.0 provides a systematic benchmark for failure diagnosis in cinematic multi-talker audio-video generation.

Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) exacerbate safety risks by introducing vulnerabilities across multiple modalities, such as language and vision. Current MLLM safety evaluation tools, however, suffer from major limitations: 1) English-centric dataset construction, and 2) a focus on generic risks that are not tied to local cultural contexts. This paper introduces KSAFE-MM, a benchmark for Korean multimodal safety evaluation that covers both general safety risks and culture-specific vulnerabilities. KSAFE-MM consists of two parts, KSAFE-MM-G and KSAFE-MM-C. KSAFE-MM-G evaluates globally shared risks in Korean contexts through linguistic contextualization, which transforms generic safety queries into contextually grounded multimodal samples. KSAFE-MM-C targets culture-dependent MLLM safety vulnerabilities using localized visual queries derived from real-world contexts. It pairs these visual queries with jailbreak-style textual queries to cover multimodal safety risks involving cultural visual cues and malicious textual intent. Together, these components provide a general-to-local construction pipeline for evaluating both globally shared safety risks and culture-specific vulnerabilities. We evaluate 12 state-of-the-art MLLMs on KSAFE-MM and reveal that models exhibit greater vulnerability to culturally grounded attacks than to generic ones. Notably, jailbreaking strategies substantially amplify attack success rates, with ProgramExecution yielding up to 74.2% ASR compared to 13.4% for standard queries. Furthermore, we identify a systematic trade-off between safety and over-refusal, where models achieving low ASR tend to exhibit excessive refusal behavior on benign queries. These findings highlight the urgent need for culturally grounded safety evaluation beyond English-centric benchmarks.

A key capability for video understanding is reliably linking subjects to events across time, yet whether Video Large Language Models (VideoLLMs) actually achieve this remains unclear. In this work, we introduce DistractionBench to evaluate whether VideoLLMs can robustly link subjects and events in the presence of unrelated video segments. Through controlled interventions, such as inserting short advertisement clips into longer videos, we show that VideoLLMs frequently hallucinate interactions between entities from different segments, incorrectly attributing actions from injected advertisements to subjects in the main video. We characterize this systematic hallucination as bag-of-events (BoE) behavior, where models process videos as collections of events rather than temporally structured sequences. Evaluating 11 popular VideoLLMs, we find that all models exhibit substantial BoE behavior. Our findings suggest that VideoLLMs lack reliable mechanisms for temporal grounding and motivate the development of models with more robust subject-event association.

Charts are widely used to present complex data for analysis and decision making. Existing chart understanding benchmarks mainly focus on static charts, but real-world charts are often dynamic and interactive. Key information may only appear after actions such as hovering, clicking, zooming, or dragging. Dynamic chart understanding therefore requires models to identify visible content, choose proper interactions, and reason over changing chart states. To evaluate this ability, we propose ChartAct, an interactive benchmark for dynamic chart understanding. ChartAct collects and filters 673 dynamic charts from 8 real chart websites, covers 7 common chart types, and constructs 1,440 high-quality question-answer samples. Each sample is instantiated in two environments, Dynamic Chart and Dashboard Chart, to evaluate dynamic chart understanding under different contexts. Based on ChartAct, we systematically evaluate 11 advanced multimodal models and GUI agents. Experimental results show that existing models still have clear limitations in dynamic chart understanding. The strongest model, Claude-Opus-4.7, achieves an average success rate of 84.5%, while most models remain below 60%. We also conduct detailed failure attribution and case analysis. ChartAct provides a new benchmark for studying chart understanding in real interactive environments. Codes at https://github.com/wulin-wulin/OSWorld_Chart

Advanced Large Multimodal Models (LMMs) have demonstrated impressive performance in K-12 reasoning tasks, exhibiting great promise as intelligent tutors. Realizing this potential requires models to navigate real-world examinations effectively, yet most existing benchmarks fail to capture the complexity of authentic testing environments. Specifically, most datasets are static, prone to data contamination, and are often confined to restricted modalities, disciplines, and evaluation criteria. To address these issues, we introduce LiveK12Bench, a dynamic, holistic, multi-disciplinary benchmark designed to evaluate the reasoning abilities of LMMs in realistic examination scenarios. LiveK12Bench comprises 2K+ verified questions spanning Mathematics, Physics, Chemistry, and Biology, sourced from the latest real-world exam papers and designed to grow over time. Our framework features several core innovations: 1) featuring an automated pipeline that continuously ingests and parses the latest examination papers to mitigate data leakage; and 2) proposing a novel `Mock Exam' evaluation scheme, which assesses the ability to complete end-to-end exams autonomously with accurate and efficient reasoning paths. Extensive experiments on 12 LMMs reveal that advanced models suffer substantial performance degradation under exam-realistic constraints: GPT-5's score drops from 79 to 53 (out of 100) when process rigor and efficiency are jointly evaluated. Our findings expose critical vulnerabilities, such as sensitivity to complex visual layouts, highlighting the gap between idealized reasoning capabilities and true educational readiness. Both code and dataset are publicly available.

We introduce OmniInteract, a streaming benchmark for real-time omnimodal large language models evaluated through native online inference over audio-visual streams. Unlike offline video understanding or text-prompted streaming QA, OmniInteract preserves the original audio-visual stream and requires models to process it online, without access to future content. User queries and ambient sounds are embedded in the audio track, requiring models to detect multimodal triggers, decide when to respond, and answer while the stream unfolds. OmniInteract contains 250 videos with 1,430 temporally grounded response slots: 1,062 1Q1A slots across real-time, proactive, and nested scenarios, and 368 1QnA slots for continuous task monitoring and step guidance. Each slot includes a trigger, response window, and target answer. We evaluate response correctness, timing, invalid outputs, interruption handling, and context continuity using Interaction-Aware Quality-Timeliness F1, Interruption Diagnostic Suite, and Nested Chain Completion Score. Experiments show that current models remain weak in streaming interaction, with the best overall IA-QTF1 reaching only 0.368 and the best 1QnA IA-QTF1 only 0.052. Further study on mathematical reasoning in full-duplex settings shows that offline capability does not necessarily transfer to online interaction. Code and datasets will be made publicly accessible at https://github.com/Lucky-Lance/OmniInteract.

Large multimodal models (LMMs) have rapidly advanced in perception and reasoning; however, it remains unclear whether these capabilities generalize to discovering visually grounded solutions in open-ended environments, beyond pattern recognition. In such settings, intelligence requires more than answering well-posed questions: it involves identifying how elements in a scene can be repurposed in non-obvious yet physically feasible ways. This form of creative problem-solving is central to human intelligence, but remains largely untested in current benchmarks. To evaluate this ability, we introduce MM-CreativityBench, a benchmark for affordance-grounded creative tool use in visually rich, physically constrained environments. Each instance presents a scenario image with structured views of candidate entities and their parts, enabling fine-grained, interactive evaluation of how models iteratively inspect the scene, identify relevant affordances, and compose visually and physically grounded solutions. Our experiments show that current LMMs often fall short, not due to lack of generative capability, but because they do not sustain grounded exploration. Models often overlook relevant entities, under-examine critical parts, or hallucinate attributes not grounded in the image. Motivated by this failure mode, we propose affordance-grounded alignment, which casts creative tool use as a preference learning problem. Using Direct Preference Optimization, we encourage models to prefer attribute-affordance reasoning grounded in visual evidence over hallucinated alternatives. In addition, we incorporate supervision derived from an affordance knowledge base to guide broader entity exploration and multi-turn planning. Our results show consistent gains in selecting the correct entities and parts, while substantially reducing hallucination and grounding-related errors.

Urgent suspected colorectal cancer (CRC) referrals create operational bottlenecks because semi-structured clinical documents often require manual review and transcription. The original RAPTOR system used Large Language Models for structured extraction but relied on a separate OCR stage, making it vulnerable to handwriting, layout variation, and loss of visual evidence linkage. We present RAPTOR+, a multimodal extension that uses Vision-Language Models (VLMs) for end-to-end referral understanding. We evaluate fine-tuned VLMs, commercial and open-source zero-shot VLMs, and the original OCR-based pipeline on 223 clinically curated CRC urgent referral forms. We also introduce a grounding-aware evaluation framework that measures both extraction accuracy and evidence localisation. Results show a clear grounding gap in zero-shot models. Gemini 2.5 Flash achieved 92.6% Reading Accuracy but only 1.2% Strict Safety. In contrast, fine-tuned Qwen3-VL-8B achieved 96.1% Reading Accuracy and 60.6% Strict Safety, substantially improving verifiable evidence grounding. These findings show that task-specific fine-tuning is essential for reliable, auditable clinical document understanding. RAPTOR+ enables extracted referral decisions to be linked to visual evidence, supporting safer and more efficient cancer referral triage.

Recent multimodal large language models (MLLMs) achieve strong performance on visual reasoning benchmarks, yet it remains unclear to what extent such performance reflects reasoning directly grounded in visual evidence. We introduce VisReason, a benchmark for vision-centric reasoning in everyday scenarios where perception and inference are tightly coupled. VisReason contains 1,505 questions across 10 categories spanning perceptual, structural, and conceptual reasoning. Our evaluation shows that VisReason poses a qualitatively different challenge from existing benchmarks, exposing substantial gaps between humans and current MLLMs and revealing limited benefits from test-time reasoning strategies. VisReason offers a focused diagnostic for evaluating vision-centric reasoning beyond language.

The 1st Cross-Domain EgoCross Challenge at EgoVis, CVPR 2026 evaluates whether multimodal large language models can reason over egocentric videos across surgery, industry, extreme sports, and animal perspective. We achieved second place in both the Source-Limited and Open-Source tracks. In this report, we formulate EgoCross as a robust cross-domain embodied video reasoning problem rather than a simple multiple-choice visual question answering task. We identify three key challenges: (C1) temporal boundary ambiguity, where critical state transitions are sparsely sampled and often occur between frames; (C2) cross-domain semantic granularity mismatch, where the same capability requires different domain-specific visual grammar; and (C3) decision instability under close options, where long multimodal reasoning can select unsupported distractors or produce malformed outputs. To address them, we propose OmniEgo-R$^2$ (Omnidomain Egocentric Routed Reasoning), a unified routed reasoning pipeline consisting of temporal-evidence normalization, domain-agnostic capability routing, structured perception--dynamics--decision reasoning, boundary-aware option verification, and defensive answer calibration. OmniEgo-R$^2$ uses the Qwen3-VL-4B-SFT checkpoints on each EgoCross domain as the visual-language backbone, and wraps them with lightweight test-time reasoning and parsing programs. Our final submissions obtain 66.35% overall accuracy in the Source-Limited track and 66.77% in the Open-Source track, ranking second in both leaderboards. The codes are available on https://github.com/Lee-zixu/OmniEgo-R2

Chart descriptions are essential for accessibility, cross-modal retrieval, and assisting readers in extracting insights from complex visualizations. As multimodal large language models (MLLMs) are increasingly adopted for automated chart description generation, a critical question arises: how faithfully and insightfully do these models actually describe charts? Current benchmarks fall short on two fronts: existing datasets consist of simple, homogeneous charts paired with shallow, fact-enumerating descriptions; and prevailing metrics fail to capture the multi-faceted nature of description quality. To address these gaps, we present the Chart Faithfulness and Insightfulness Benchmark (ChartFI-Bench). We first summarize four dimensions that characterize high-quality chart descriptions: factual accuracy, salient feature emphasis, domain-informed guidance, and chart-text complementarity. Guided by these dimensions, we construct a high-quality benchmark comprising 896 chart-description pairs, which feature visually complex charts and semantically rich descriptions. Furthermore, we design four aligned evaluation metrics -- Faithfulness, Coverage, Informativeness, and Acuity -- to systematically assess the quality of descriptions across these dimensions. Experiments conducted on mainstream MLLMs demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed framework and reveal common weaknesses among existing models.

Medical diagnosis is not a single prediction from a fully specified vignette. It is a sequential workup: clinicians decide what evidence to obtain, revise a differential diagnosis, and stop when the diagnosis is sufficiently supported. Most medical AI benchmarks instead reveal the relevant context upfront and score only the final answer, making unsupported correct guesses, premature closure, inefficient workups, and poor uncertainty updating invisible. We introduce DDX-TRACE, a physician-adjudicated benchmark for multimodal neuroradiology that evaluates diagnostic trajectories under hidden evidence over 211 challenging cases. Each case begins with limited clinical history; models request imaging studies in free form, receive matched image bundles when available, update a probabilistic differential diagnosis after each turn, and stop with a localized final diagnosis. Evaluating state-of-the-art VLMs, we find that final diagnosis scores can substantially misrepresent workup quality: models may guess plausible diagnoses without essential evidence, request useful studies but misinterpret raw images, or acquire evidence inefficiently while updating uncertainty poorly. Controlled evidence variants isolate bottlenecks in planning, visual evidence extraction, and downstream differential reasoning. DDX-TRACE shifts medical AI evaluation from final answers to evidence-supported diagnostic trajectories.

Multimodal alignment is critical for bridging the semantic gap in information retrieval. However, traditional pairwise strategies introduce a geometric blind spot: while they align anchor modalities (e.g., text) with others, they lack constraints to enforce mutual consistency between peripheral modalities (e.g., video and audio). The TRIANGLE framework addresses this by minimizing the area of modality triplets on a hypersphere to enforce holistic alignment. In this reproducibility study, we verify the robustness of this geometric objective for retrieval tasks. We confirm that TRIANGLE outperforms pairwise baselines in zero-shot settings, achieving Recall@1 gains of up to +8.7 points, though benefits are domain-dependent. However, we fail to reproduce the reported learning-from-scratch results. Analysis using a synthetic toy dataset attributes this to instability when jointly optimizing geometric alignment with Data-Text Matching (DTM) loss. Furthermore, we find that cosine regularization primarily stabilizes text-to-video retrieval, and fine-tuning with domain supervision amplifies geometric benefits but reduces cross-dataset generalization. Our findings support the efficacy of geometric alignment while highlighting critical optimization sensitivities. Code available at https://github.com/ARIJIT00171/RE-TRIANGLE.

Emotion Recognition in Conversation is a core component of affective computing, while current sign language emotion datasets primarily focus on isolated sentences and lack conversational context. Models trained exclusively on these isolated utterances demonstrate degraded performance in real world scenarios because they cannot utilize historical dialogue flow. To address this structural limitation, we introduce the ERC task to sign language video analysis and propose the eJSL Dialog dataset. Constructed using the scripts from the STUDIES corpus, the dataset contains 1,920 video samples organized into 480 unique dialogues. We conduct systematic benchmarking on this dataset using models ranging from isolated visual networks to multimodal conversational architectures. The results suggest the feasibility of extending conversational ERC frameworks to sign-language dialogue under the current benchmark setting, while also revealing limitations in existing visual representations for capturing sign-specific affective cues, motivating future work on sign-specific visual modeling and larger sign-language conversational training resources.

The attack surface of a multimodal large language model (MLLM) is language-dependent in ways that reveal the mechanistic structure of alignment failures. We present the first systematic cross-lingual, multimodal red-teaming study comparing jailbreak vulnerability in US English (en-US) and Mexican Spanish (es-MX) across four frontier MLLMs: Claude Sonnet 4.5, GPT-5, Pixtral Large, and Qwen Omni. Using a fixed adversarial benchmark of 363 diverse prompt scenarios administered in text-only and multimodal conditions, we collected 52,272 harm ratings and binary attack success judgements from matched panels of nine native-speaker annotators per language group. Our central finding is that language does not scale vulnerability uniformly. Bayesian mixed-effects analyses reveal that linguistic framing attacks such as role-play become substantially less effective under Spanish prompting, while visually explicit multimodal attacks become more effective, which directly implicates the prompt-language interface rather than global annotator leniency. This dissociation indicates that linguistic and visual alignment failures operate through distinct mechanisms, and that switching language is sufficient to expose that separation. The practical consequence is that safety rankings are not preserved across languages. Qwen Omni overtakes Pixtral Large as the most vulnerable model among es-MX participants, a rank reversal no scalar correction of English-condition scores could recover, and absolute attack success rates have declined across model generations without closing the gaps between them. These findings demonstrate that safety evaluation frameworks treating language and modality as independent dimensions fundamentally misspecify the attack surface of globally deployed MLLMs, and must be redesigned accordingly.

Evaluation in scientific reconstruction is dominated by pointwise metrics - RMSE, MAE, per-event resolution - under the implicit assumption that lower error means better reconstruction. We show that this assumption fails structurally for inverse problems with multimodal posteriors. By the law of total variance, point estimators trained to minimize MSE or MAE produce a marginal spectrum strictly narrower than the truth whenever the posterior has nonzero width. The resulting bias is independent of architecture, training, and dataset size, and it compresses precisely the spectral features - tails, modes, shapes - that downstream scientific measurements rely on. We propose a three-part evaluation protocol where each step targets a failure mode the others miss: per-event distributional accuracy via CRPS, population-level marginal accuracy via a spectrum-fidelity diagnostic, and uncertainty trustworthiness via coverage-based calibration. On a synthetic benchmark with an analytic posterior and on a realistic many-to-one inverse problem from particle physics, model rankings reverse between pointwise and distributional metrics, and calibration further separates architectures indistinguishable under CRPS. The evaluation protocol, not the model, determines the scientific conclusion.

Agricultural decision-making increasingly requires multimodal systems that can transform visual observations into reliable, executable actions. However, existing agricultural multimodal benchmarks mainly evaluate final-answer correctness and provide limited support for assessing whether models can use external tools to complete precision-sensitive workflows. In this paper, we introduce AgroTools, a benchmark for evaluating tool-augmented multimodal agents in agriculture. AgroTools contains 539 question-answer instances paired with 1,097 heterogeneous agricultural images, spanning five task families and an executable environment of 14 agricultural tools. Each query is annotated with structured tool-use traces, enabling a dual-view evaluation of both process-level execution quality and outcome-level task success. We benchmark 9 open-source and 4 closed-source multimodal large language models on AgroTools. Results show that current models remain far from reliable in agricultural tool-use settings, with clear bottlenecks in tool planning, argument generation, execution recovery, and final-answer synthesis. We hope AgroTools will support future research on multimodal agents for high-precision agricultural applications. The benchmark and evaluation are available at https://huggingface.co/datasets/AgroTools/AgroTools.

Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) are increasingly deployed in human-facing roles where personality perception is critical, yet existing benchmarks evaluate this capability solely on numerical Big Five score prediction, leaving open whether models truly perceive personality through behavioral understanding or merely prejudge through superficial pattern matching. We address this gap with three contributions. (i) A new task: we formalize Grounded Personality Reasoning (GPR), which requires MLLMs to anchor each Big Five rating in observable evidence through a chain of rating, reasoning, and grounding. (ii) A new dataset: we release MM-OCEAN (1,104 videos, 5,320 MCQs), produced by a multi-agent pipeline with human verification, with timestamped behavioral observations, evidence-grounded trait analyses, and seven categories of cue-grounding MCQs. (iii) Benchmark and analysis: we design a three-tier evaluation (rating, reasoning, grounding) plus four sample-level failure-mode metrics: Prejudice Rate (PR), Confabulation Rate (CR), Integration-failure Rate (IR), and Holistic-grounding Rate (HR), and benchmark 27 MLLMs (13 closed, 14 open). The analysis uncovers a striking Prejudice Gap: across the field, 51% of correct ratings are not grounded in retrieved cues, and the Holistic-Grounding Rate spans only 0-33.5%. These findings expose a disconnect between getting the right score and reasoning for the right reason, charting a roadmap for grounded social cognition in MLLMs.

While Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) have demonstrated remarkable proficiency in general video understanding, their capacity to interpret involuntary, and spatio-temporally evolving pathologic motor behaviors such as seizure semiology remains largely untested. To address this gap, we introduce Seizure-Semiology-Suite, a clinically grounded dataset and benchmark for fine-grained, structured seizure semiology understanding. The dataset includes 438 seizure videos annotated with over 35,000 dense labels covering 20 ILAE-defined semiological features. Building on this dataset, we propose a seven-task hierarchical benchmark that systematically evaluates MLLMs from low-level visual perception to temporal sequencing, narrative report generation, and seizure diagnosis. To enable clinically meaningful evaluation of generated reports, we further introduce the Report Quality Index for Seizure Semiology (Seizure-RQI). Extensive baselines across 11 open-weight MLLMs reveal systematic weaknesses in laterality reasoning, temporal localization, symptom sequencing, and clinically faithful reporting. We show that seizure-specific fine-tuning substantially improves performance across tasks, and that a two-stage neuro-symbolic framework achieves an F1 score of 0.96 on epileptic versus non-epileptic seizure classification. Seizure-Semiology-Suite establishes a rigorous benchmark for evaluating multimodal models in safety-critical medical video understanding and guides the development of clinically reliable, domain-adaptive multimodal intelligence.

The rapid development of Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) has led to growing interest in egocentric video understanding, specifically the ability for MLLMs to recognize fine-grained hand-object interactions, track object state changes over time, and reason about manipulative processes in dynamic environments from a first-person perspective. However, existing egocentric video benchmarks suffer from \textbf{limited grounded rationale evaluation}, offering limited support for fine-grained operation-centric reasoning and rarely examining whether model rationales are grounded in explicit spatio-temporal evidence. To address this gap, we introduce \textbf{EgoCoT-Bench}, a fine-grained egocentric benchmark for grounded and verifiable operation-centric reasoning with explicit step-by-step rationale annotations. Overall, EgoCoT-Bench comprises 3,172 verifiable QA pairs over 351 egocentric videos separated into four task groups for a total of 12 sub-task groups, encompassing perception and retrospection, anticipation, and high-level reasoning. The benchmark is constructed through a spatio-temporal scene graphs (STSG) guided generation framework and is further refined by human annotators to ensure correctness, egocentric relevance and fine-grained quality. Experimental results show continuing difficulties with egocentric fine-grained reasoning and further reveal that many multimodal models produce explanations that are answer-correct, but have evidence that is inconsistent with the answer. We hope EgoCoT-Bench can serve as a useful testbed for grounded and verifiable reasoning in egocentric video understanding. Project page and supplementary materials are available at: https://dstardust.github.io/EgoCoT/.

Visual Question Answering (VQA), as the representative multimodal task, serves as a key benchmark for evaluating the reasoning capabilities of Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs). However, existing evaluations largely rely on static datasets and accuracy-based metrics, which fail to capture robustness, consistency, and generalization. Inspired by Metamorphic Testing (MT), we propose Metamorphic Robustness Assessment (MetaRA), a testing framework that employs Metamorphic Relations (MRs) to systematically probe vulnerabilities in MLLM-based VQA systems. MetaRA generates controlled variations of image-question inputs based on specific MRs and evaluates models across diverse conditions. Applying MetaRA to multiple MLLM-based VQA models across different tasks reveals nuanced failure patterns, including sensitivity to linguistic perturbations, over-reliance on superficial visual cues, and deeper weaknesses in multimodal reasoning. Experimental results demonstrate that MetaRA provides richer diagnostic insights than conventional accuracy metrics, exposing failure modes that remain hidden under standard benchmarks. Overall, this work highlights the need for systematic robustness evaluation in VQA and positions metamorphic assessment as a scalable, model-agnostic approach toward trustworthy multimodal AI.

While Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) exhibit strong performance on standard video tasks, their ability to faithfully summarize and reason over complex narratives remains poorly evaluated. Existing summarization benchmarks fragment supervision across isolated granularities, such as keyframes, key shots, or disjointed text summaries, failing to capture the inherently hierarchical structure of cross-modal alignment. To address this critical gap, we introduce HAVEN, a hierarchically aligned multimodal benchmark for unified video understanding. HAVEN pioneers a fully granular (frame, shot, and video levels) and fully multimodal (video and text) dataset architecture, complete with explicit, continuous alignment between modalities. Built upon this unified annotation paradigm, we propose a comprehensive evaluation suite spanning summarization, temporal reasoning, multimodal grounding, and saliency ranking. Extensive benchmarking of state-of-the-art MLLMs exposes a persistent gap between surface-level textual fluency and grounded multimodal understanding. Ultimately, HAVEN advances the evaluation of multimodal systems beyond traditional QA formats, offering a rigorous, standardized testbed to drive future research in interpretable, hierarchical video understanding. We publicly release the dataset, benchmark suite, and evaluation protocols.