Multimodal Reasoning

With the increasing development of Vision-Language Models, it becomes imperative that their predictions are readily explainable to relevant stakeholders. However, the field of explainability has not kept pace with the multimodal surge. While recent Multimodal Explainable AI (MxAI) methods generate explanations to attribute the interaction between different modalities, current evaluation protocols lack the ground truth required to distinguish between true cross-modal reasoning (e.g., spatial composition) and shallow cross-modal shortcuts (e.g., Bag-of-Words attribute matching). It remains unknown whether MxAI methods faithfully capture synergistic interactions or merely hallucinate reasoning on models acting as simple feature detectors. In this paper, we introduce GridVQA-X, the first diagnostic framework specifically designed to evaluate cross-modal explainability. Unlike natural datasets, GridVQA-X leverages a closed-world synthesis logic to generate unique, mathematically guaranteed explanations. We utilize this controlled environment to train paired ground-truth models on identical architectures: $M_{\text{pure}}$, which learns robust spatial-relational reasoning and $M_{\text{spur}}$, which is structurally forced to rely on cross-modal shortcuts. This behavioral divergence creates a rigorous testbed: a faithful explainer must report distinct reasoning pathways for each model. Our findings reveal that widely used methods fail to distinguish between models relying on genuine spatial-relational reasoning and those exploiting cross-modal shortcuts, highlighting a critical gap in capturing true cross-modal synergy and misrepresenting how multimodal models actually make decisions.

World models and multimodal large language models (MLLMs) provide complementary capabilities for predicting future outcomes from static visual observations. World models can generate concrete visual rollouts of possible futures, while MLLMs can reason abstractly over questions, goals, and rules. However, generated rollouts are stochastic and may be visually plausible but task-incorrect, making it necessary to determine when visual simulation is useful, whether a rollout is credible, and how it should influence the final answer. We formulate this problem as controlled concrete reasoning, where a model learns to invoke, verify, and integrate visual future simulation alongside abstract reasoning. To study this setting, we construct two human-verified benchmarks, VRQABench for controllable spatial lookahead and OpenWorldQA for open-domain physical prediction, and propose Privileged-Future On-Policy Self-Distillation (PF-OPSD). During training, PF-OPSD uses ground-truth future videos and answers only as teacher-side privileged context to evaluate on-policy concrete-reasoning trajectories, while the deployable student never observes true futures at test time. Experimental results show that PF-OPSD outperforms baseline by 10.6% and 10.9% on VRQABench and OpenWorldQA, respectively, while increasing robustness to noisy or conflicting rollouts. Our code and dataset are available at https://github.com/yczhou001/PF-OPSD.

The rapid rise of generative AI has made multimodal fake news increasingly realistic and pervasive, posing severe threats to public trust and social stability. Existing detection methods rely heavily on manipulation-specific models and large-scale labeled data, resulting in poor generalization to emerging manipulation types. We observed that the essence of manipulated misinformation lies in its intrinsic conflicts, \textbf{i.e.,} semantic or physical inconsistencies either across modalities or with common world knowledge. Inspired by this observation, we propose \textbf{C}onflict-\textbf{O}riented \textbf{RE}asoning (\textbf{CORE}) framework, an effective paradigm that learns to endows multimodal large language models (MLLMs) with explicit conflict-capturing capability. To this end, CORE first constructs the Conflict Attribution Corpus (CAC) with fine-grained annotations of conflict factors and sources, providing essential data support for subsequent conflict perception training. By performing conflict-oriented representation enhancement and reasoning based on CAC, CORE achieves robust and generalizable conflict detection, effectively and rapidly adapting to unseen manipulation types with a few samples or in even zero-shot settings. Extensive experiments demonstrate that CORE surpasses state-of-the-art models. The dataset and code are publicly available at https://github.com/shen8424/CORE.

Despite rapid progress, multimodal large language models (MLLMs) still fail on tasks that humans solve effortlessly, such as navigating a grid maze from a screenshot or selecting the correct puzzle piece. Rather than retraining the model, we ask a complementary question: how much capability can be elicited from a frozen MLLM purely by improving the execution scaffold around it? We introduce MUSE, a multimodal unified structured execution harness that wraps any off-the-shelf MLLM with composable modules for task representation, visual processing, perception tool use, structured parsing, deterministic verification, and verifier-guided repair, without any model retraining. We evaluate MUSE across diverse benchmarks spanning visual spatial planning, visual perception, multimodal reasoning, and fine-grained visual discrimination, using multiple state-of-the-art MLLMs. MUSE delivers consistent gains over the bare model in all settings, with the largest jumps on challenging instances. Further analysis reveals that many MLLM failures arise from harness-level shortcomings rather than fundamental model deficits, and can be addressed through verifier-guided repair without touching the model. These findings highlight the agentic multimodal harness as a critical yet underexplored design dimension, offering an orthogonal avenue for improving MLLMs beyond model-centric optimization.

Multimodal spatial reasoning often relies on long chains of intermediate textual and visual thoughts, where accumulating visual tokens and dense cross-modal attention incur substantial computation and memory overhead. To address this challenge, we propose Spectral-Progressive Thought Flow (SpecFlow), a novel lightweight multimodal spatial reasoning framework that represents intermediate visual thoughts in a fixed-size discrete cosine space. By exploiting strong energy compaction, SpecFlow preserves global layout and relational structure while introducing high-frequency details only when increased spatial precision is required. To align visual state evolution with linguistic intent, classifier-free guidance enables autoregressive textual thoughts to steer flow-based updates of the visual workspace/state without expanding the context. As a result, SpecFlow maintains a bounded visual workspace whose updates depend only on the current visual state and accumulated textual trace, enabling long-horizon inference with stable latency and memory usage independent of reasoning depth. Empirical results show that SpecFlow achieves competitive or superior reasoning performance while reducing computation and KV cache costs by up to 2.1 times.

Tool-augmented multimodal agents show strong benchmark gains, often taken as evidence that agents have learned to use tools. We argue that this interpretation can be premature: a tool-call trace alone does not show whether the tool supplied answer-critical information. We study two representative ``thinking with images'' agents, Thyme and DeepEyesV2, across real-world understanding, OCR, chart understanding, and mathematical reasoning. Each agent is compared with its Tool-Free counterpart and with a Pure-Text Reasoner trained from the same source pool without tool-calling trajectories. Tool access yields little consistent aggregate improvement, does not reliably reduce generated-token cost, and leaves only a small tool-only solved set: 93% of DeepEyesV2's tool-solved problems and 96% of Thyme's are also solved by at least one non-tool setting. Mechanism ablations further show that the full tool-use loop does not consistently outperform either the tool-call format or the returned execution result alone. In the settings we study, the analyzed agents appear to learn tool-calling patterns more reliably than tool-contributed capabilities, suggesting that evaluation should distinguish tool availability from whether tools actually expand what agents can solve.

Understanding modality interaction in multimodal large language models (MLLMs) is central to reliable deployment. We introduce Partial Information Decomposition (PID) as a decision-level framework that separates unique, redundant, and synergistic contributions of sensory and linguistic inputs, beyond representation alignment and outcome-based evaluation. Across vision--language benchmarks, PID reveals recurring modality-use profiles: reasoning and grounding-oriented tasks tend to exhibit high synergy, whereas expert and knowledge-oriented tasks show stronger language-unique reliance. These profiles generalize across model families and predict sensitivity to modality-level interventions. We further extend PID to tri-modal systems with Sensory PID, treating language as a control variable to decompose video--audio information gain. Applied to omni-modal models, Sensory PID reveals a sensory synergy bottleneck dominated by visual information even on audio--visual fusion tasks. Finally, PID-guided reweighting provides initial evidence for improving multimodal reasoning and grounding performance.

The CASTLE Challenge @ EgoVis 2026 evaluates long-form egocentric video question answering over 600+ hours of multi-perspective recordings. Each four-choice question requires evidence from videos, transcripts, auxiliary photos, people, days, rooms, and temporal context. We propose an evidence-aware multimodal reasoning pipeline based on Qwen. Our system parses question hints, retrieves ASR chunks, attaches auxiliary images, samples candidate video frames, and routes questions into static visual, speech/text, temporal, and mixed types with specialized prompts. Multiple inference passes are aggregated by confidence-weighted voting and converted into the official Codabench format. In ablation, LoRA improves the score from 0.21 to 0.50, and more sampled frames further raise it to 0.58. Our final system ranks first in the CASTLE Challenge @ EgoVis 2026.

Effective visual communication stems from the harmony of multiple design principles, such as readability, contrast, alignment, overlap, and coherence, which collectively govern clarity and intent of the communicator. While human designers reason holistically over these principles, machine agents typically condense them into a single heuristic score, offering limited interpretability and diagnostic precision. To address this gap, we introduce PRISM (PRinciple-aware, Interpretable, and Structure-guided Design Modifications), a benchmark that systematically perturbs professional layouts from the Crello dataset along measurable design principles. The benchmark comprises 100K perturbed training samples and 10K perturbed validation designs, each isolating a specific principle violation for controlled analysis of multimodal reasoning about design quality. We show that models like Qwen-2.5-VL and GPT-4o-mini are largely insensitive to targeted principle degradations, whereas GPT-4o exhibits global awareness without fine-grained disentanglement. Building on these insights, we propose a multi-scale evaluation framework that integrates lightweight scorers for quantitative assessment, instruction-tuned vision-language models for localised feedback, and prompt-based methods for global reasoning. Our framework provides interpretable explanations of design failures. Using these localised insights, we show targeted refinements that improve layout quality. Together, PRISM and our framework lay the foundation for interpretable design-literate multimodal reasoning systems.

With the rapid advancement of large multimodal models (LMMs), inference-time overhead has become a key bottleneck for real-world deployment. Existing methods typically prune visual tokens at prefill, assuming the required visual evidence remains static during reasoning. However, we empirically show that visual evidence is strongly step-dependent: only a sparse subset of visual tokens is critical at each decoding step, and the critical set evolves across reasoning. Furthermore, we identify a coupled bottleneck where redundant visual context can steer the model toward query-irrelevant regions, lengthening the reasoning trace. Guided by these insights, we propose VisionPulse, a step-wise visual token pruning framework during reasoning. VisionPulse computes a lightweight visual attention mass to estimate the step-wise retention budget by exploiting its strong positive correlation with LMMs' effective visual token usage and retain only the most critical tokens under this budget. By enforcing visual sparsity during reasoning, VisionPulse filters redundant visual context while preserving relevant visual evidence, shortening reasoning traces naturally. Extensive experiments show that VisionPulse only retains 5% of visual tokens per step with reasoning traces shortened by 11.2%, while keeping accuracy almost unchanged.

Food-as-Medicine requires models to reason beyond what a dish is or what nutrition it contains: they must decide whether a concrete food choice is appropriate for a specific health condition. Existing food AI benchmarks primarily evaluate dish recognition, recipe understanding, nutrient estimation, or general nutrition question answering, leaving this health-aware decision layer largely untested. We introduce FAM-Bench, a multi-modal Food-as-Medicine benchmark with 2500 nutrition-expert-verified instances across 13 diet-related health conditions. The benchmark contains two complementary tasks: dish-level suitability assessment, where models judge whether a dish is suitable for a condition from its image and ingredient list, and comparative dish analysis, where models rank four candidate dishes by condition-specific suitability. Both tasks require integrating ingredient evidence, visual preparation cues, and clinical nutrition constraints, providing a standardized testbed for grounded health-aware reasoning in language and vision-language models.

Multimodal large language models (MLLMs) often know the rule but pick the wrong answer: on abstract visual reasoning (AVR) tasks, a model can describe what it sees and name the underlying pattern, yet still fail to choose the matching candidate. Existing AVR benchmarks cannot detect this because they collapse perception, rule induction, and answer selection into a single right-or-wrong signal. We introduce StemBind, a shared-stem diagnostic benchmark that probes the same visual stem with three aligned questions: Perception (what is in the image), Rule (what pattern governs it), and Full (which option completes it), so a final-answer error can be attributed to a specific sub-step on the same evidence. StemBind contains 2,298 curated knowledge-light stems across nine auditable visual operations, totaling 19,533 P/R/F tasks, with each full item annotated by Sternberg's four reasoning stages (S1 Encode, S2 Infer, S3 Map, S4 Apply). Evaluating 24 frontier MLLM configurations yields four findings. (i) The R-F chasm: rule accuracy exceeds full-item accuracy on 22 of 24 models, so most failures happen after the rule is identified. (ii) A persistent binding gap: even when P and R are both correct on the same stem, models still answer F incorrectly 51.2% of the time. (iii) The bottleneck is S3: process diagnostics and Stage-wise Stimulus Augmentation localize the dominant failure to rule-to-instance mapping. (iv) Scaling and thinking do not help: neither larger models nor explicit thinking mode reliably closes the gap, and thinking even lowers rule and full-item accuracy. StemBind reframes AVR evaluation from final-answer ranking to locating where abstract visual reasoning breaks down, identifying rule-to-instance binding as a concrete next target for vision-grounded reasoning.

Understanding how harm emerges from interaction between otherwise benign image-text pairs requires intent-aware cross-modal reasoning beyond surface-level features. Existing vision-language models (VLMs) excel at literal reasoning over perceptual cues but often fail to derive harmful semantics that rely on implicit, context-dependent reasoning. To evaluate VLMs on compositional harm detection and reasoning, we introduce Multimodal Pragmatic Harm Interpretation (MuPHI), a dataset containing image-text pairs where harm is encoded in subtle multimodal cues. MuPHI spans diverse harm categories and includes annotated harm rationales for assessing VLM reasoning chains. To improve both detection and reasoning in VLMs, we propose MuPHIRM, a reasoning-augmented training framework which learns joint semantics by optimizing multi-perspective rewards. MuPHIRM improves both harm detection and reasoning quality of VLMs while demonstrating superior out-of-distribution robustness compared to both trained and inference-time baselines. Our findings suggest that reasoning-oriented reward optimization offers a promising direction towards building multimodal systems that generalize beyond benchmark-specific shortcuts.

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.

With the rapid advancement of multimodal large language models (MLLMs), models have demonstrated increasingly powerful multimodal capabilities. However, whether MLLMs trained through statistical learning can truly understand the causal relationships underlying the real world remains a key research question. In recent years, numerous multimodal causal reasoning datasets have been proposed. Nevertheless, these datasets are either limited in scale or constructed from synthetic images and videos, cartoon-based content, or other non-realistic multimodal sources. To address these limitations, we collect real-world videos and construct DMC-CF-Static, a large-scale benchmark for multimodal causal counterfactual reasoning. Furthermore, to mitigate issues such as data contamination in traditional static evaluation, we represent causal events using causal graphs and propose the Dynamic Graph Intervention (DGI) framework to build the dynamic evaluation benchmark DMC-CF-Dynamic from DMC-CF-Static. Experimental results on the overall DMC-CF, which includes both static and dynamic evaluation benchmarks, demonstrate that the multimodal causal reasoning capabilities of current multimodal large language models in real-world scenarios still require substantial improvement.

Vision-language models with extended reasoning succeed on complex problems, but many real-world problems require external tools that internal reasoning alone often cannot resolve. Agentic reasoning therefore interleaves two behaviors with a structural asymmetry: thinking (the self-contained default) and tool use (a high-variance auxiliary acting). We refer to this asymmetry as the Thinking-Acting Gap. Under standard RL recipes like GRPO, the gap manifests as two diagnostic symptoms during training: tool use is attempted on only ~30% of rollouts, and when attempted, the tool-using rollouts within a group are all-wrong on ~40% of questions, suppressing the learning signal at the tool calls that needed it. We propose AXPO (Agent eXplorative Policy Optimization): for each all-wrong tool-using subgroup, AXPO fixes the thinking prefix and resamples the tool call and its continuation, paired with uncertainty-based prefix selection. Across nine multimodal benchmarks and three scales of Qwen3-VL-Thinking, SFT+AXPO outperforms SFT+GRPO at average (+1.8pp Pass@1 and +1.8pp Pass@4 at 8B on average) and 8B with SFT+AXPO surpasses the 32B Base on Pass@4 with 4 times fewer parameters.

Existing benchmarks have laid the foundation for travel planning agents by establishing API-centric paradigms. However, as the capabilities of Autonomous Agents continue to advance, their evaluation must evolve beyond simple tool execution toward handling the inherent complexities of the open web. Current benchmarks bypass core cognitive hurdles: they fail to account for information noise, ignore multi-source factual contradictions, and overlook the necessity of grounding visual perception into logical planning. We introduce VeriTrip, a verifiable benchmark designed to meet the increasing demands for agent robustness and reliability. VeriTrip shifts the evaluation focus to evidence-grounded reasoning over unstructured multimodal web corpora. It establishes a Multimodal Retrieval Base (MRB) derived from real-world sources, forcing agents to autonomously orchestrate queries across heterogeneous data. A synchronized Verifiable Knowledge Base (VKB) enables a cell-wise verification protocol that precisely quantifies factual reliability, distinguishing systematic reasoning failures from parametric hallucinations. Our evaluations across leading MLLMs reveal a critical \textit{retrieval-reasoning trade-off}: the cognitive load of autonomous retrieval significantly erodes instruction retention. VeriTrip provides the rigorous foundation necessary for the next generation of planning agents capable of operating in unconstrained, multimodal environments.

Speculative reasoning has recently been proposed as a means to accelerate reasoning-intensive generation in large multimodal models, but its effectiveness is often constrained by misalignment between speculative drafts and target-verified reasoning. In this work, we introduce DREAM-R, a framework that substantially improves the performance of speculative reasoning. At its core, DREAM-R employs Speculative Alignment Policy Optimization (SAPO), a reinforcement-learning objective that trains draft models to generate reasoning steps that are both faithful to target trajectories and concise. We further propose a Threshold-based Verification Mechanism (TBVM) that uses a ratio-based criterion to provide stable and interpretable acceptance of speculative steps only when positive evidence clearly dominates, thereby preventing error propagation. Building on these components, we develop a Fully Parallel Speculative Reasoning (FPSR) framework that parallelizes draft generation, target-side reasoning, and verification across multi-step reasoning, enabling early stopping and clean fallback. Experiments on reasoning-heavy benchmarks demonstrate up to speedup while preserving target-model accuracy, yielding substantial efficiency gains without compromising reasoning quality.

E-commerce platforms have begun recruiting crowdsourced jurors to adjudicate massive volumes of transaction disputes. Unlike formal legal judgment, E-commerce dispute verdicts require grounding pivotal clues from redundant, multi-round, multimodal evidence and making decisions under flexible platform-specific conventions. These characteristics render existing methods insufficient for this scenario. To bridge this gap, we introduce a pioneering task, E-commerce Dispute Verdicts (EDV), and present VerdictBench, a multimodal benchmark comprising 6,000 real-world cases designed to reflect crowdsourced jury decisions. Building upon this, we propose CyberJurors, a multi-agent framework to clarify the dispute logic and regulate the verdict process. At the individual level, Individual Verdict Chain-of-Thought decomposes the EDV task into four structured reasoning stages, enabling fine-grained clue perception and clarifying causal logic between pivotal clues and the dispute focus. At the collective level, Jury Consensus Verdict simulates multi-round discussion and voting among jurors, while incorporating verdict precedents to mitigate cognitive biases toward either disputant. Experiments on VerdictBench show that CyberJurors outperforms state-of-the-art LLMs, MLLMs, and court simulators, while achieving stronger alignment with real-world jury voting patterns. Code and dataset are available at https://github.com/YanhuiS/CyberJurors and https://huggingface.co/datasets/piggi/VerdictBench.

Multi-hop audio-visual reasoning remains challenging for Omni-LLMs, as relevant evidence is often sparse, temporally dispersed, and distributed across both audio and visual streams. Existing benchmarks provide limited investigation of this setting, typically involving only a limited number of modalities, relevant temporal segments, or reasoning steps. In this work, we introduce MOV-Bench, a benchmark containing 519 carefully curated questions that require multi-hop reasoning over temporally dispersed audio-visual evidence. Evaluations on MOV-Bench reveal that current Omni-LLMs still struggle with multi-hop cross-modal reasoning. To address this challenge, we further propose AOP-Agent, an efficient agentic framework built on open-source Omni-LLMs for active omni-modal perception. By combining a hierarchical omni-modal memory with a collaborative observe-reflect-replan loop, AOP-Agent enables open-source Omni-LLMs to perform active perception without additional training or proprietary models. Experiments on MOV-Bench and OmniVideoBench demonstrate that AOP-Agent consistently improves reasoning performance, with particularly notable gains on long videos and reasoning-intensive questions.

Existing multimodal reasoning approaches predominantly follow two paradigms: converting visual inputs into text prior to reasoning, or performing end-to-end reasoning within a unified vision-language representation space. Despite their empirical progress, both paradigms suffer from fundamental structural limitations. The former relies on static visual-to-text conversion, which tends to compress and lose fine-grained visual details. The latter is prone to linguistic dominance induced by joint optimization and attention mechanisms, leading to systematically weakened faithfulness to visual evidence during reasoning. In this work, we argue that a central challenge is how and when visual evidence is introduced into the reasoning process. Motivated by this insight, we propose CSMR, a multimodal reasoning framework in which a language model controls the reasoning process by deciding when to invoke an independent visual perception module to acquire task-relevant visual evidence. Experiments across multiple multimodal reasoning benchmarks show that CSMR consistently outperforms representative baseline methods in accuracy under a zero-shot setting. Further experimental analysis confirms that these advantages primarily arise from the proposed cognitive scheduling mechanism.

Audio and omni-modal large language models exhibit impressive cross-modal reasoning capabilities. However, applying standard reinforcement learning post-training algorithms to these models exposes a critical structural vulnerability: methods like GRPO apply uniform policy gradients across all tokens, ignoring their unequal dependence on the non-text source modality. This exacerbates late-stage modality collapse during extended chain-of-thought generation, where models progressively abandon the primary source signal in favor of compressed textual priors, leading to confident but ungrounded hallucinations. To address this, we introduce Modality-Aware Policy Optimization (MAPO), a novel dual-branch reinforcement learning framework. First, MAPO dynamically concentrates the policy gradient on modality-critical tokens using a modality relevance mask, which is derived from the cross-modal differential entropy between an audio-ablated reference and the multimodal policy. Second, it integrates an auxiliary attention loss branch that applies a targeted, temporally scaled penalty to the model's internal attention distributions. This ensures the model actively sustains cross-modal grounding deep into the reasoning trace. Evaluations on complex audio reasoning benchmarks demonstrate that MAPO substantially improves long-horizon reasoning fidelity and multimodal instruction following, achieving highly competitive performance and setting new state-of-the-art results on several key benchmarks among open-weight models. By relying strictly on native statistical signals rather than domain-specific inductive biases, MAPO offers a promising foundation for mitigating epistemic collapse across diverse multimodal systems.

While rule-based reinforcement learning has recently catalyzed explicit reasoning in multimodal models, tactile reasoning remains largely underexplored. Existing tactile-language models primarily rely on supervised or contrastive objectives, which limits their capacity to ground predictions in physical evidence or rectify misleading visual priors. Tactile reasoning introduces two modality-specific challenges: the ordinal nature of physical attributes (e.g., hardness, roughness) and the cross-sensor distribution shifts inherent in optical tactile hardware. In this work, we introduce TouchReason-1M, a large-scale multimodal dataset comprising over 1M synchronized tactile pairs across four distinct sensors, and TouchReason-Bench, a rigorous framework for evaluating tactile perception and visual-tactile conflict resolution. Building upon these, we propose Touch-R1, a tactile reasoning MLLM based on Qwen2.5-VL-7B. Touch-R1 is trained via a tactile-grounded GRPO objective that combines ordinal-aware accuracy, cross-sensor physical consistency, structured-format control, and an input-side tactile grounding objective. Specifically, the tactile-use reward assigns credit only when authentic tactile inputs yield superior correctness relative to counterfactual controls where the tactile stream is removed, shuffled, or noise-masked. On TouchReason-Bench, Touch-R1-7B outperforms Octopi-13B by 18.4% and GPT-4o by 24.7% on average. Its structured reasoning traces reveal emergent behaviors of probing, comparison, and revision, demonstrating that R1-style reasoning can be effectively grounded in physical contact.

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.

While vision-language models (VLMs) have exhibited multi-turn visual reasoning capabilities, their reasoning trajectories remain relatively shallow and are dominated by a text-centric paradigm, limiting their applicability to complex visual challenges. In contrast, human-like thought typically involves long-horizon reasoning with an interleaved visual-textual chain-of-thought (VT-CoT). To bridge this gap, we introduce InterSketch, an interleaved reasoning model to enhance the VT-CoT capability via self-correcting and stepwise reward mechanisms. InterSketch dynamically generates intermediate visual sketches using external tools and interleaves them with textual reasoning, enabling effective perception and logical reasoning over long-horizon visual understanding tasks. Specifically, in the first cold-start stage, we propose a synthesized high-quality interleaved VT-CoT dataset and include a reflection mechanism to enable the model's capability in multi-turn interleaved reasoning and self-correction. In the subsequent reinforcement learning (RL) stage, we design a stepwise reward mechanism to mitigate the sparsity of reward signals inherent in end-only supervision over long-horizon reasoning. Extensive experiments on visual reasoning benchmarks demonstrate the effectiveness of InterSketch, even outperforming proprietary models such as Gemini-3-Pro.

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.

The application of generalist multimodal models (GMMs) to specialized scientific domains remains limited due to the scarcity of comprehensive domain-specific datasets that integrate multiple data modalities beyond text and images. In seismology, understanding earthquake phenomena requires the synthesis of timeseries waveform data, geographical imagery, and contextual metadata, a multimodal integration absent in existing seismic datasets. We present MultiSeismo, a large scale structured multimodal seismic dataset, comprising over 16K seismic events spanning 13 years (2010 to 2023) across diverse geographical regions. Each event data integrates waveform recordings from global station networks, intensity maps, population exposure visualizations, and a comprehensive textual description within a standardized JSON format. We additionally develop MISCE, a multimodal instruction set on top of raw data to enable supervised training and evaluation of GMMs on seismic reasoning tasks ranging from basic information retrieval to complex cross modal analysis. We leverage MISCE to finetune an existing multimodal model (Unified IO 2) enhanced with a specialized timeseries encoder, which yields SeisModal, the first domain specific multimodal model for comprehensive seismic analysis. Evaluation of state of the art multimodal models on MultiSeismo reveals significant challenges, particularly with time-series data processing for general purpose models, while demonstrating SeisModal's superior performance on seismic multimodal reasoning tasks. These results prove that MultiSeismo provides a rigorous benchmark for future multimodal research in seismology and validate the success of our domain specific architectural adaptations.

Post-training via Supervised Fine-Tuning (SFT) and Reinforcement Learning (RL) is crucial for enhancing reasoning in Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs), yet existing paradigms often reach a performance bottleneck due to the limitations of static data. While current methods leverage self-reflection or self-evolution to push these boundaries, they still suffer from cognitive drift and hallucinated reasoning paths caused by low-quality synthetic data. To address these challenges, we propose Anchor Evolution (AnE), a new paradigm that integrates truth-anchored data curation and model evolution, achieving faithful and steady performance gains at the reasoning frontier. Specifically, we propose Truth Anchor Expansion, which pinpoints the model failing frontier via trajectory rollouts and leverages ground-truth databases to retrieve high-fidelity anchors for faithful data curation. Subsequently, we introduce the Scaffold-Stripping Mechanism to internalize reasoning capabilities. This mechanism first anchors reasoning paths via scaffold-augmented supervision to mitigate the learning complexity and distribution drift of direct SFT on raw data, then leverages RL to strip the scaffold template, thereby effectively transitioning the reasoning paths into intrinsic model capabilities. Experimental results on multimodal reasoning benchmarks show that our method substantially advances the model performance frontier, improving the base model by 10.3% across eight multimodal benchmarks and achieving state-of-the-art results. The code will be made publicly available.

Visual reasoning through reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) has achieved remarkable progress. However, when dealing with multi-source inputs, existing approaches tend to treat them as a mere accumulation of information, lacking explicit mechanisms to distinguish whether integrating additional sources yields information gain or introduces interference. Therefore, they struggle to effectively model dynamic interaction when integrating multiple sources, particularly when they differ significantly in physical properties and semantics, e.g., infrared and depth, leading to inferior performance to mono-source reasoning when a certain source holds the dominant signal. To address this issue, we propose MARS, a novel mono-anchored multi-source reasoning framework that models each visual modality as an independent information source. Specifically, by treating mono-source rewards as dynamic anchors, our method explicitly incorporates the information gain introduced by multi-source fusion into advantage normalization and adaptively emphasizes mutual promotion between sources while suppressing potential noise or conflicts during RLVR. From theoretical analysis, our method effectively quantifies information gain introduced by multi-source integration in gradient estimation, enabling consistent modality regulation. Empirical results also show impressive 3.2% and 4.9% performance gains on GRPO and DAPO across diverse datasets, confirming effectiveness of our method.

Deploying multimodal systems in real-world environments often entails handling modality-missing scenarios, where one or more modalities are unavailable. While recent studies address this challenge for the general Multimodal Transformer (MT) architecture via prompt tuning, we identify a fundamental limitation in these methods: the Implicit Modality-Reduction bottleneck. By conditioning prompts solely on the observed modalities, they inadvertently restrict the reasoning scope of MTs to the modality-reduced subspace, cutting off access to the latent information sources of the missing modalities. To overcome this limitation, we propose AOEPT, which pioneers a novel modal-contextualized prompting fashion. Specifically, we introduce lightweight Modal-Contextualized Prompts (MCPs) that distill global modality-wise priors from training data, serving as latent repositories of the information sources for missing modalities. Conditioned on the remaining modalities, these MCPs are instantiated into instance-aware prompts that selectively augment missing-modality information for each sample, thereby restoring the reasoning scope of MTs beyond the observed-modality-only subspace. Experiments across various multimodal benchmarks and backbones confirm the strong performance of AOEPT, with minimal computational overhead.