Multimodal Model Evaluation

Persuasive visuals play a central role in advertising, public communication, and online media, making it increasingly important to understand whether an image is persuasive and why. However, current Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) have limited ability to reason about visual persuasion. Our analysis reveals that models often rely on a shortcut---selectively citing easily recognizable visual elements and treating their mere presence as evidence of persuasiveness---rather than reasoning over the diverse visual cues in an image to determine how and why they contribute to persuasiveness. To address this limitation, we propose (1) a fine-tuning approach that trains models on rationales reflecting diverse perspectives on visual persuasiveness, and (2) an evaluation framework that measures the faithfulness of models' rationales through three complementary metrics. Fine-tuning on multi-perspective rationales improves persuasiveness prediction and reasoning effectiveness. However, our evaluation framework reveals a discrepancy between prediction performance and rationale faithfulness, showing that higher prediction performance does not necessarily correspond to more faithful reasoning. These findings highlight the need to evaluate effectiveness and faithfulness separately and inform future directions for improving both the training and evaluation of visual persuasion reasoning.

Evaluating whether Multimodal Large Language Models can produce trustworthy, verifiable reasoning over long, visually rich documents requires evaluation beyond end-to-end answer accuracy. We introduce DocScope, a benchmark that formulates long-document QA as a structured reasoning trajectory prediction problem: given a complete PDF document and a question, the model outputs evidence pages, supporting evidence regions, relevant factual statements, and a final answer. We design a four-stage evaluation protocol -- Page Localization, Region Grounding, Fact Extraction, and Answer Verification -- that audits each level of the trajectory independently through inter-stage decoupling, with all judges selected and calibrated via human alignment studies. DocScope comprises 1,124 questions derived from 273 documents, with all hierarchical evidence annotations completed by human annotators. We benchmark 6 proprietary models, 12 open-weight models, and several domain-specific systems. Our experiments reveal that answer accuracy cannot substitute for trajectory-level evaluation: even among correct answers, the highest observed rate of complete evidence chains is only 29%. Across all models, region grounding remains the weakest trajectory stage. Furthermore, the primary difficulty stems from aggregating evidence dispersed across long distances and multiple document clusters, while an oracle study identifies faithful perception and fact extraction as the dominant capability bottleneck. Cross-architecture comparisons further suggest that activated parameter count matters more than total scale. The benchmark and code will be publicly released at https://github.com/MiliLab/DocScope.

In the context of today's high-pressure, aging society, the demand for large-scale emotional models capable of providing empathetic support is more critical than ever. However, existing benchmarks fail to simultaneously achieve ecological validity, signal clarity, and reliable fine-grained labeling. We introduce EmoS, a high-fidelity bilingual benchmark designed to resolve the limitations of ecological validity and noise in existing datasets by combining strictly filtered static slices with a dynamic Streaming Monologue subset. Supported by a rigorous dual-layer human annotation pipeline, EmoS provides trusted ground truth that captures continuous emotional evolution. Empirical results show that fine-tuning MLLMs (multimodal large language models) on EmoS yields significant gains over zero-shot baselines, laying the foundation for the training and evaluation of future emotion recognition models and empathy models. The dataset and code are publicly available at https://github.com/NLP2CT/EmoS.

Current omni-modal benchmarks mainly evaluate models under settings where multiple modalities are provided simultaneously, while the ability to start from audio alone and actively search for cross-modal evidence remains underexplored. In this paper, we introduce \textbf{Omni-DeepSearch}, a benchmark for audio-driven omni-modal deep search. Given one or more audio clips and a related question, models must infer useful clues from audio, invoke text, image, and video search tools, and perform multi-hop reasoning to produce a short, objective, and verifiable answer. Omni-DeepSearch contains 640 samples across 15 fine-grained categories, covering four retrieval target modalities and four audio content types. A multi-stage filtering pipeline ensures audio dependence, retrieval necessity, visual modality necessity, and answer uniqueness. Experiments on recent closed-source and open-source omni-modal models show that this task remains highly challenging: the strongest evaluated model, Gemini-3-Pro, achieves only 43.44% average accuracy. Further analyses illustrate key bottlenecks in audio entity inference, query formulation, tool-use reliability, multi-hop retrieval, and cross-modal verification. These results highlight audio-driven omni-modal deep search as an important and underexplored direction for future multimodal agents.

AI models are increasingly deployed in live clinical environments where they must perform reliably across complex, high-stakes workflows that standard training and validation datasets were never designed to capture. Evaluating these systems requires benchmarks: structured combinations of tasks, datasets, and metrics that enable reproducible, comparable measurement of what a model can do. The central challenge in healthcare AI is not performance alone, but the absence of systematic methods to measure reliability, safety, and clinical relevance under real-world conditions. Most existing benchmarks test what a model knows; too few test whether it can perform reliably and without failing across the full complexity of real clinical tasks. Current benchmarks have accumulated through ad hoc dataset construction optimized for narrow task performance: frontier models achieve near-perfect scores on medical licensing examinations, but when evaluated across real clinical tasks, performance degrades sharply, scoring 0.74--0.85 on documentation, 0.61--0.76 on clinical decision support, and only 0.53--0.63 on administrative and workflow tasks \cite{medhelm}. High benchmark scores give a false sense of deployment readiness, and the gap between performance and utility widens precisely as AI systems take on more consequential clinical roles. Without a principled framework for benchmark design, the field cannot determine whether poor clinical performance reflects model limitations or failures in how performance is being measured.

Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) have made rapid progress in single-video understanding, yet their ability to reason across multiple independent video streams remains poorly understood. Existing multi-video benchmarks rely largely on human-annotated real-world footage, limiting the precision of spatial, temporal, and physical ground truth and making it difficult to diagnose model failures. We introduce SYNCR, a controlled synthetic benchmark for cross-video reasoning with programmatically verified grounding. Built using Habitat, Kubric, and CLEVRER simulator engines, SYNCR contains 4,000 multi-video question-answer pairs grounded in 4,827 unique videos. It evaluates MLLMs across eight tasks spanning four diagnostic pillars: Temporal Alignment, Spatial Tracking, Comparative Reasoning, and Holistic Synthesis. Our zero-shot evaluation of leading open- and closed-weight MLLMs reveals a substantial gap between current models and humans: the best model achieves only 64.5% average accuracy, compared to an 89.5% human baseline. Models perform relatively well on temporal ordering but struggle with precise physical and spatial reasoning, with the best model reaching only 29.8% accuracy on Kinematic Comparison. We further find that parameter scaling and reasoning-specialized post-training improve temporal alignment capabilities, but do not reliably address fine-grained physical tracking or global spatial synthesis. Finally, a sim-to-real correlation analysis suggests that SYNCR tracks model-level trends on a real-world multi-video benchmark.

Remote sensing lithology interpretation is fundamental to geological surveys, mineral exploration, and regional geological mapping. Unlike general land-cover recognition, lithology interpretation is a knowledge-intensive task that requires experts to infer rock types from various features, e.g., subtle visual, spectral, textural, geomorphological, and contextual cues, making reliable automated interpretation highly challenging. Geological knowledge-guided large multimodal models offer new opportunities, yet their evaluation remains constrained by the lack of benchmarks that capture lithological annotations, multi-level geological semantics, and expert-informed assessment. Here, we propose LithoBench, a multi-level benchmark for evaluating geological semantic understanding in remote sensing lithology interpretation. LithoBench contains 10,000 expert-annotated interpretation instances across 12 representative lithological categories, including 4,000 multiple-choice and 6,000 open-ended tasks organized into five cognitive levels: Identification and Description, Comparative Analysis, Mechanism Explanation, Practical Application, and Comprehensive Reasoning. We further develop an expert-in-the-loop, knowledge-grounded semi-automated construction pipeline, coupling multi sub-processes, e.g., structured geological image descriptions, to enhance geological validity and evaluation reliability. Experiments with multiple large vision-language models eveal substantial limitations in geological semantic understanding, particularly on higher-order explanation, application, and reasoning tasks.

Real-world audio-visual understanding requires chaining evidence that is sparse, temporally dispersed, and split across the visual and auditory streams, whereas existing benchmarks largely fail to evaluate this capability. They restrict videos to short clips, isolate modalities, or reduce questions to one-hop perception. We introduce TraceAV-Bench, the first benchmark to jointly evaluate multi-hop reasoning over long audio-visual trajectories and multimodal hallucination robustness. TraceAV-Bench comprises 2,200 rigorously validated multiple-choice questions over 578 long videos, totaling 339.5 hours, spanning 4 evaluation dimensions and 15 sub-tasks. Each question is grounded in an explicit reasoning chain that averages 3.68 hops across a 15.1-minute temporal span. The dataset is built by a three-step semi-automated pipeline followed by a strict quality assurance process. Evaluation of multiple representative OmniLLMs on TraceAV-Bench reveals that the benchmark poses a persistent challenge across all models, with the strongest closed-source model (Gemini 3.1 Pro) reaching only 68.29% on general tasks, and the best open-source model (Ming-Flash-Omni-2.0) reaching 51.70%, leaving substantial headroom. Moreover, we find that robustness to multimodal hallucination is largely decoupled from general multimodal reasoning performance. We anticipate that TraceAV-Bench will stimulate further research toward OmniLLMs that can reason coherently and faithfully over long-form audio-visual content.

Existing benchmarks for multimodal agentic search evaluate multimodal search and visual browsing, but visual evidence is either confined to the input or treated as an answer endpoint rather than part of an interleaved search trajectory. We introduce \textbf{InterLV-Search}, a benchmark for Interleaved Language-Vision Agentic Search, in which textual and visual evidence is repeatedly used to condition later search. It contains 2,061 examples across three levels: active visual evidence seeking, controlled offline interleaved multimodal search, and open-web interleaved multimodal search. Beyond existing benchmarks, it also includes multimodal multi-branch samples that involve comparison between multiple entities during the evidence search. We construct Level 1 and Level 2 with automated pipelines and Level 3 with a machine-led, human-supervised open-web pipeline. We further provide InterLV-Agent for standardized tool use, trajectory logging, and evaluation. Experiments on proprietary and open-source multimodal agents show that current systems remain far from solving interleaved multimodal search, with the best model below 50% overall accuracy, highlighting challenges in visual evidence seeking, search control, and multimodal evidence integration. We release the benchmark data and evaluation code at https://github.com/hbhalpha/InterLV-Search-Bench

Referring expression grounding is a core problem in visual grounding and is widely used as a diagnostic of spatial grounding and reasoning in vision and language models, yet most prior work focuses on natural images. In contrast, existing chart referring expression grounding-related benchmarks remain limited: (1) they largely adopt bounding boxes, constraining localization precision for fine chart elements (2) they mostly assume a single and two referred target instances, failing to handle multi-instance target references; (3) the language expressions over-rely on textual cues or data-rank clues (4) they cover only a narrow range of chart types. To address these issues, we introduce a chart referring expression grounding benchmark that systematically supports multiple localization forms, multiple referred targets, diverse grounding cues and diverse chart types. Results across representative multimodal large models reveal a significant performance gap. We further introduce a code-driven synthesis pipeline that exploits the inherent alignment between plotting programs and rendered chart primitives to derive pixel accurate instance masks across chart element types and granularities. We train an instance segmentation model with the synthesized masks and integrate it into a general-purpose multimodal grounding framework. The resulting system consistently outperforms baselines on our benchmark and generalizes well to a ChartQA-derived real-chart grounding benchmark.

Existing Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) remain primarily reactive, failing to continuously perceive environments or proactively assist users. While emerging benchmarks address proactivity, they are largely confined to alert scenarios, neglect personalized context, and fail to evaluate the precise timing of human-machine interactions (HMI).In this paper, we introduce EgoPro-Bench, a novel benchmark for training and evaluating proactive interaction capabilities based on streaming egocentric videos; it comprises 2,400 videos in the evaluation set and over 12,000 videos in the training set.Unlike previous works, EgoPro-Bench leverages simulated user profiles to generate diverse user intentions and to construct high-fidelity HMI data across 12 distinct domains.Subsequently, we propose a specialized evaluation protocol and metrics, train proactive interaction models designed for efficient reasoning and low-latency interaction on streaming video data, and conduct comprehensive evaluations.Furthermore, we introduce an interaction principle termed "short thinking, better interaction", which allocates a limited token budget prior to intent recognition, thereby enhancing interaction performance.The experiments demonstrate that EgoPro-Bench substantially enhances the intention understanding capabilities of MLLMs and enables accurate identification of appropriate timings for HMI, thereby laying a solid foundation for next-generation user-centric proactive interactive agents.

The pursuit of artificial general intelligence necessitates robust methods for evaluating the cognitive capabilities of models beyond narrow task performance. Here, we introduce a psychometric framework to assess the cognitive profiles of generative AI, comparing them to human norms and tracking their evolution across generations. Initial evaluation of leading multimodal models using tasks adapted from the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale revealed a profoundly uneven cognitive architecture: near-ceiling performance in verbal comprehension and working memory (>$98^{\text{th}}$ percentile) contrasted with near-floor performance in perceptual reasoning (<$1^{\text{st}}$ percentile). To track developmental trajectories beyond human-normed limits, we developed the Artificial Intelligence Quotient (AIQ) Benchmark and applied it to six generations and two model families, revealing significant but asymmetric performance gains. Notably, we uncovered a sharp dissociation between modalities; abstract quantitative reasoning matured far more rapidly when presented linguistically compared to a visually analogous format, indicating an architectural bias towards language-based symbolic manipulation. While abstract visual reasoning improved, visual-perceptual organization remained largely stagnant. Collectively, these findings demonstrate that the cognitive abilities of generative models are evolving unevenly, suggesting that scaling and optimization approaches to AGI development alone may be insufficient to overcome fundamental architectural limitations in achieving balanced, human-like general intelligence.

Despite the growing popularity of Multimodal Domain Generalization (MMDG) for enhancing model robustness, it remains unclear whether reported performance gains reflect genuine algorithmic progress or are artifacts of inconsistent evaluation protocols. Current research is fragmented, with studies varying significantly across datasets, modality configurations, and experimental settings. Furthermore, existing benchmarks focus predominantly on action recognition, often neglecting critical real-world challenges such as input corruptions, missing modalities, and model trustworthiness. This lack of standardization obscures a reliable assessment of the field's advancement. To address this issue, we introduce MMDG-Bench, the first unified and comprehensive benchmark for MMDG, which standardizes evaluation across six datasets spanning three diverse tasks: action recognition, mechanical fault diagnosis, and sentiment analysis. MMDG-Bench encompasses six modality combinations, nine representative methods, and multiple evaluation settings. Beyond standard accuracy, it systematically assesses corruption robustness, missing-modality generalization, misclassification detection, and out-of-distribution detection. With 7, 402 neural networks trained in total across 95 unique cross-domain tasks, MMDG-Bench yields five key findings: (1) under fair comparisons, recent specialized MMDG methods offer only marginal improvements over ERM baseline; (2) no single method consistently outperforms others across datasets or modality combinations; (3) a substantial gap to upper-bound performance persists, indicating that MMDG remains far from solved; (4) trimodal fusion does not consistently outperform the strongest bimodal configurations; and (5) all evaluated methods exhibit significant degradation under corruption and missing-modality scenarios, with some methods further compromising model trustworthiness.

Medical multimodal large language models (MLLMs) have advanced image understanding and short-video analysis, but real clinical review often requires full-procedure video understanding. Unlike general long videos, medical procedures contain highly redundant anatomical views, while decisive evidence is temporally sparse, spatially subtle, and context dependent. Existing benchmarks often assume this evidence has already been localized through images, short clips, or pre-segmented videos, leaving the retrieval-before-reasoning problem under-tested. We introduce MedHorizon, an in-the-wild benchmark for long-context medical video understanding. MedHorizon preserves 759 hours of full-length clinical procedures and provides 1,253 evidence-grounded multiple-choice questionsthat jointly evaluate sparse evidence understanding and multi-hop clinical reasoning. Its evidence is extremely sparse, with only 0.166% evidence frames on average, requiring models to search noisy procedural streams before interpreting and aggregating findings. We evaluate representative general-domain, medical-domain, and long-video MLLMs. The best model reaches only 41.1% accuracy, showing that current systems remain far from robust full-procedure understanding. Further analysis yields four key findings: performance does not scale reliably with more frames, evidence retrieval and clinical interpretation remain primary bottlenecks; these bottlenecks are rooted in weak procedural reasoning and attention drift under redundancy, and generic sampling methods only partially balances local detail with global coverage. MedHorizon provides a rigorous testbed for MLLMs that retrieve sparse evidence and reason over complete clinical workflows.

Multimodal knowledge editing (MKE) aims to correct the internal knowledge of large vision-language models after deployment, yet the behavioral patterns of post-edit models remain underexplored. In this paper, we identify a systemic failure mode in edited models, termed Entity Identity Confusion (EIC): edited models exhibit an absurd behavior where text-only queries about the original entity's identity unexpectedly return information about the new entity. To rigorously investigate EIC, we construct EC-Bench, a diagnostic benchmark that directly probes how image-entity bindings shift before and after editing. Our analysis reveals that EIC stems from existing methods failing to distinguish between Image-Entity (I-E) binding and Entity-Entity (E-E) relational knowledge in the model, causing models to overfit E-E associations as a shortcut: the image is still perceived as the original entity, with the new entity's name serving only as a spurious identity label. We further explore potential mitigation strategies, showing that constraining edits to the model's I-E processing stage encourages edits to act more faithfully on I-E binding, thereby substantially reducing EIC. Based on these findings, we discuss principled desiderata for faithful MKE and provide methodological guidance for future research.

We introduce TableVista, a comprehensive benchmark for evaluating foundation models in multimodal table reasoning under visual and structural complexity. TableVista consists of 3,000 high-quality table reasoning problems, where each instance is expanded into 10 distinct visual variants through our multi-style rendering and transformation pipeline. This process encompasses diverse scenario styles, robustness perturbations, and vision-only configurations, culminating in 30,000 multimodal samples for a multi-dimensional evaluation. We conduct an extensive evaluation of 29 state-of-the-art open-source and proprietary foundation models on TableVista. Through comprehensive quantitative and qualitative analysis, we find that while evaluated models remain largely stable across diverse rendering styles, they exhibit pronounced performance degradation on complex structural layouts and vision-only settings, revealing that current models struggle to maintain reasoning consistency when structural complexity combines with visually integrated presentations. These findings highlight critical gaps in current multimodal capabilities, providing insights for advancing more robust and reliable table understanding models.

Although Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) have achieved remarkable progress across many domains, their training on large-scale multimodal datasets raises serious privacy concerns, making effective machine unlearning increasingly necessary. However, existing benchmarks mainly focus on static or short-sequence settings, offering limited support for evaluating continual privacy deletion requests in realistic deployments. To bridge this gap, we introduce ICU-Bench, a continual multimodal unlearning benchmark built on privacy-critical document data. ICU-Bench contains 1,000 privacy-sensitive profiles from two document domains, medical reports and labor contracts, with 9,500 images, 16,000 question-answer pairs, and 100 forget tasks. Additionally, new continual unlearning metrics are introduced, facilitating a comprehensive analysis of forgetting effectiveness, historical forgetting preservation, retained utility, and stability throughout the continual unlearning process. Through extensive experiments with representative unlearning methods on ICU-Bench, we show that existing methods generally struggle in continual settings and exhibit clear limitations in balancing forgetting quality, utility preservation, and scalability over long task sequences. These findings highlight the need for multimodal unlearning methods explicitly designed for continual privacy deletion.

The communication of scientific knowledge has become increasingly multimodal, spanning text, visuals, and speech through materials such as research papers, slides, and recorded presentations. These different representations collectively convey a study's reasoning, results, and insights, offering complementary perspectives that enrich understanding. However, despite their shared purpose, such materials are rarely connected in a structured way. The absence of explicit links across formats makes it difficult to trace how concepts, visuals, and explanations correspond, limiting unified exploration and analysis of research content. To address this gap, we introduce the Multimodal Conference Dataset (MCD), the first benchmark that integrates research papers, presentation videos, explanatory videos, and slides from the same works. We evaluate a range of embedding-based and vision-language models to assess their ability to discover fine-grained cross-format correspondences, establishing the first systematic benchmark for this task. Our results show that vision-language models are robust but struggle with fine-grained alignment, while embedding-based models capture text-visual correspondences well but equations and symbolic content form distinct clusters in the embedding space. These findings highlight both the strengths and limitations of current approaches and point to key directions for future research in multimodal scientific understanding. To ensure reproducibility, we release the resources for MCD at https://github.com/meghamariamkm2002/MCD

Modern astronomical observatories generate a massive volume of multimodal data, creating a critical bottleneck for expert human review. While multimodal large language models (LLMs) have shown promise in interpreting complex visual and textual inputs, their ability to perform specialized scientific classification while providing interpretable reasoning remains understudied. We introduce AstroAlertBench, a comprehensive multimodal benchmark designed to evaluate LLM performance in astronomical event review along a three-stage logical chain: metadata grounding, scientific reasoning, and hierarchical classification over five categories. We use a pilot sample of 1,500 real-world alerts from the Zwicky Transient Facility (ZTF), a wide-field survey that scans the northern sky to detect transient astronomical events. On this dataset, we benchmark 13 frontier closed-source and open-weight LLMs that support visual input. Our results reveal that high accuracy does not always align with model ``honesty,'' defined as the ability to self-evaluate its reasoning, which affects its reliability as a real-world assistant. We further initialize a human-in-the-loop evaluation protocol as a precursor to future community-scale participation. Together, AstroAlertBench provides a framework for developing calibrated and interpretable astronomical assistants.

Image Difference Captioning (IDC) generates natural language descriptions that precisely identify differences between two images, serving as a key benchmark for fine-grained change perception, cross-modal reasoning, and image editing data construction. However, existing benchmarks lack diversity and compositional complexity, and standard lexical-overlap metrics (e.g., BLEU, METEOR) fail to capture semantic consistency or penalize hallucinations, which together prevent a comprehensive and robust evaluation of multimodal large language models (MLLMs) on IDC. To address these gaps, we introduce DiffCap-Bench, a comprehensive IDC benchmark covering ten distinct difference categories to ensure diversity and compositional complexity. Furthermore, we propose an LLM-as-a-Judge evaluation protocol grounded in human-validated Difference Lists, enabling a robust assessment of models' ability to both capture and describe visual changes. Through extensive evaluation of state-of-the-art MLLMs, we reveal significant performance gaps between proprietary and open-source models, highlight the critical importance of reasoning capability, and identify clear limitations in model scaling. Our framework also demonstrates strong alignment with human expert judgments and strong correlation with downstream image editing data construction quality. These findings establish DiffCap-Bench as both a reliable IDC evaluation framework and a practical predictor of downstream utility. The benchmark and code will be made publicly available to support further research.

Large Multimodal Models (LMMs) have recently shown strong performance on Optical Character Recognition (OCR) tasks, demonstrating their promising capability in document literacy. However, their effectiveness in real-world applications remains underexplored, as existing benchmarks adopt task scopes misaligned with practical applications and assume homogeneous acquisition conditions. To address this gap, we introduce CC-OCR V2, a comprehensive and challenging OCR benchmark tailored to real-world document processing. CC-OCR V2 focuses on practical enterprise document processing tasks and incorporates hard and corner cases that are critical yet underrepresented in prior benchmarks, covering 5 major OCR-centric tracks: text recognition, document parsing, document grounding, key information extraction, and document question answering, comprising 7,093 high-difficulty samples. Extensive experiments on 14 advanced LMMs reveal that current models fall short of real-world application requirements. Even state-of-the-art LMMs exhibit substantial performance degradation across diverse tasks and scenarios. These findings reveal a significant gap between performance on current benchmarks and effectiveness in real-world applications. We release the full dataset and evaluation toolkit at https://github.com/eioss/CC-OCR-V2.

Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) have demonstrated robust capabilities in recognizing everyday human activities, yet their potential for analyzing clinically significant involuntary movements in neurological disorders remains largely unexplored. This pilot study evaluates the capability of MLLMs for automated recognition of pathological movements in seizure videos. We assessed the zero-shot performance of state-of-the-art MLLMs on 20 ILAE-defined semiological features across 90 clinical seizure recordings. MLLMs outperformed fine-tuned Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) and Vision Transformer (ViT) baseline models on 13 of 18 features without task-specific training, demonstrating particular strength in recognizing salient postural and contextual features while struggling with subtle, high-frequency movements. Feature-targeted signal enhancement (facial cropping, pose estimation, audio denoising) improved performance on 10 of 20 features. Expert evaluation showed that 94.3 percent of MLLM-generated explanations for correctly predicted cases achieved at least 60 percent faithfulness scores, aligning with epileptologist reasoning. These findings demonstrate the potential of adapting general-purpose MLLMs for specialized clinical video analysis through targeted preprocessing strategies, offering a path toward interpretable, efficient diagnostic assistance. Our code is publicly available at https://github.com/LinaZhangUCLA/PathMotionMLLM.

Real-world video editing demands not only expert knowledge of cinematic techniques but also multimodal reasoning to select, align, and combine footage into coherent narratives. While recent Large Multimodal Models (LMMs) have shown remarkable progress in general video understanding, their abilities in multi-video reasoning and operational editing workflows remain largely unexplored. We introduce VEBENCH, the first comprehensive benchmark designed to evaluate both editing knowledge understanding and operational reasoning in realistic video editing scenarios. VEBENCH contains 3.9K high-quality edited videos (over 257 hours) and 3,080 human-verified QA pairs, built through a three-round human-AI collaborative annotation pipeline that ensures precise temporal labeling and semantic consistency. It features two complementary QA tasks: 1) Video Editing Technique Recognition, assessing models' ability to identify 7 editing techniques using multimodal cues; and 2) Video Editing Operation Simulation, modeling real-world editing workflows by requiring the selection and temporal localization of relevant clips from multiple candidates. Extensive experiments across proprietary (e.g., Gemini-2.5-Pro) and open-source LMMs reveal a large gap between current model performance and human-level editing cognition. These results highlight the urgent need for bridging video understanding with creative operational reasoning. We envision VEBENCH as a foundation for advancing intelligent video editing systems and driving future research on complex reasoning.

Text-in-image editing has become a key capability for visual content creation, yet existing benchmarks remain overwhelmingly English-centric and often conflate visual plausibility with semantic correctness. We introduce MULTITEXTEDIT, a controlled benchmark of 3,600 instances spanning 12 typologically diverse languages, 5 visual domains, and 7 editing operations. Language variants of each instance share a common visual base and are paired with a human-edited reference and region masks, isolating the language variable for cross-lingual comparison. To capture script-level errors that coarse text-matching metrics miss, such as missing diacritics, reversed RTL order, and mixed-script renderings, we introduce a language fidelity (LSF) metric scored by a two-stage LVM protocol that first traces the edited target text and then judges it in isolation, reaching a quadratic-weighted \k{appa} of 0.76 against native-speaker annotators. Evaluating 12 open-source and proprietary systems with LSF alongside standard semantic and mask-aware pixel metrics, we find pronounced cross-lingual degradation for every model, largest on Hebrew and Arabic and smallest on Dutch and Spanish, and concentrated in text accuracy and script fidelity rather than in coarse structural dimensions. We also uncover a pervasive semantic and pixel mismatch, where outputs preserve global layout and background fidelity yet distort script-specific forms.

Machine unlearning in Vision-Language Models (VLMs) is required for compliance with the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), yet current evaluation practices are inconsistent. We present the first systematic study of metric reliability in multimodal unlearning. Five standard metrics, Forget Accuracy (FA), Retain Accuracy (RA), Membership Inference Attack (MIA), Activation Distance (AD), and JS divergence (JS), yield conflicting method rankings across three VQA benchmarks (MLLMU-Bench, UnLOK-VQA, MMUBench). Kendall tau analysis over 36 unlearned LLaVA-1.5-7B models reveals two opposing clusters, {FA, RA, MIA} and {AD, JS}, with tau_FA_AD = -0.26, reproduced on BLIP-2 OPT-2.7B. Agreement is lower in multimodal VQA (average tau = 0.086) than in unimodal classification (average tau = 0.158; difference = 0.072), indicating that dual image-and-text pathways amplify inconsistency. We introduce the Unified Quality Score (UQS), a composite metric with weights derived from each metric's Spearman correlation with the oracle distance d(M_hat, M_star), where M_star is the oracle model retrained only on the retain set. RA shows the strongest reliability (rho = 0.484, p = 0.003), while FA is negatively correlated (rho = -0.418, p = 0.011). UQS yields stable rankings under 100 random weight perturbations (tau = 0.647 +- 0.262). We release the benchmark, 36 checkpoints, and an interactive leaderboard. Code and pre-computed results are available at https://github.com/neurips26/UnifiedUnl.

Human-level agentic intelligence extends beyond low-level geometric perception, evolving from recognizing where things are to understanding what they are for. While existing benchmarks effectively evaluate the geometric perception capabilities of multimodal large language models (MLLMs), they fall short of probing the higher-order cognitive abilities required for grounded intelligence. To address this gap, we introduce the Spatial-Functional Intelligence Benchmark (SFI-Bench), a video-based benchmark with over 1,500 expert-annotated questions derived from diverse egocentric indoor video scans. SFI-Bench systematically evaluates two complementary dimensions of advanced reasoning: (1) Structured Spatial Reasoning, which requires understanding complex layouts and forming coherent spatial representations, and (2) Functional Reasoning, which involves inferring object affordances and their context-dependent utility. The benchmark includes tasks such as conditional counting, multi-hop relational reasoning, functional pairing, and knowledge-grounded troubleshooting, directly challenging models to integrate perception, memory, and inference. Our experiments reveal that current MLLMs consistently struggle to combine spatial memory with functional reasoning and external knowledge, highlighting a critical bottleneck in achieving grounded intelligence. SFI-Bench therefore provides a diagnostic tool for measuring progress toward more cognitively capable and truly grounded multimodal agents.

Ambiguity resolution is a key challenge in multimodal machine translation (MMT), where models must genuinely leverage visual input to map an ambiguous expression to its intended meaning. Although prior work has proposed disambiguation-oriented benchmarks probing the role of vision, we observe that existing benchmarks remain limited by task-format mismatch, narrow ambiguity coverage, or insufficient visual-dependency validation. Moreover, existing ambiguity evaluations are not well suited to diverse ambiguity types in open-ended translation. To address these limitations, we present VIDA (Visually-Dependent Ambiguity), a dataset of 2,500 carefully curated instances in which resolving an annotated source span requires visual evidence. We further propose Disambiguation-Centric Metrics that use an LLM-as-a-judge classifier to verify whether annotated ambiguous expressions are resolved correctly at the span level. Evaluations with stronger recent LVLMs show that visual disambiguation remains challenging. Using chain-of-thought supervised fine-tuning as a diagnostic setting, we observe stronger out-of-distribution disambiguation than with SFT, with robust gains on collective-noun ambiguities and model-dependent gains on sentence-level ambiguities.

Unified audio-visual generation is rapidly gaining industrial and creative relevance, enabling applications in virtual production and interactive media. However, when moving from general audio-video synthesis to music-dance co-generation, the task becomes substantially harder: musical rhythm, phrasing, and accents must drive choreographic motion at fine temporal resolution, and such rhythmic coupling is not captured by unimodal metrics or generic audiovisual consistency scores used in current evaluation practice. We introduce TMD-Bench, a benchmark for text-driven music-dance co-generation that assesses systems across unimodal generation quality, instruction adherence, and cross-modal rhythmic alignment. The benchmark integrates computable physical metrics with perceptual multimodal judgments, and is supported by a curated rhythm-aligned music-dance dataset and a fine-grained Music Captioner for structured music semantics. TMD-Bench further reveals that (i) modern commercial audio-visual models, such as Veo 3 and Sora 2, produce high-quality music and video, while rhythmic coupling remains less consistently optimized and leaves room for improvement, and (ii) our unified baseline RhyJAM trained on rhythm-aligned data achieves competitive beat-level synchronization while maintaining competitive unimodal fidelity. This presents prospects for building next-generation music-dance models that explicitly optimize rhythmic and kinetic coherence.

Multi-model learning has attracted great attention in visual-text tasks. However, visual-tabular data, which plays a pivotal role in high-stakes domains like healthcare and industry, remains underexplored. In this paper, we introduce \textit{VT-Bench}, the first unified benchmark for standardizing vision-tabular discriminative prediction and generative reasoning tasks. VT-Bench aggregates 14 datasets across 9 domains (medical-centric, while covering pets, media, and transportation) with over 756K samples. We evaluate 23 representative models, including unimodal experts, specialized visual-tabular models, general-purpose vision-language models (VLMs), and tool-augmented methods, highlighting substantial challenges of visual-tabular learning. We believe VT-Bench will stimulate the community to build more powerful multi-modal vision-tabular foundation models. Benchmark: https://github.com/Ziyi-Jia990/VT-Bench

Multimodal large language models (MLLMs) have emerged as a promising paradigm for dental image analysis. However, their ability to capture the multi-level cognitive processes required for radiographic analysis remains unclear. Here, we present a comprehensive benchmark to evaluate the cognitive capabilities of MLLMs in dental radiographic analysis. It spans three critical imaging modalities, i.e., periapical, panoramic, and lateral cephalometric radiographs, and defines four cognitive categories: perception, comprehension, prediction, and decision-making. The benchmark comprises 27 clinically grounded tasks derived from public datasets, with manually curated annotations and 3,820 clinician assessments for evaluation. Six frontier MLLMs, including GPT-5.2 and GLM-4.6, are evaluated. We demonstrate the performance gap between MLLMs and clinicians in dental practice, delineate model strengths and limitations, characterize failure patterns, and provide recommendations for improvement. This data resource will facilitate the development of next-generation artificial intelligence systems aligned with clinical cognition, safety requirements, and workflow complexity in dental practice.