Model Releases
What MLLMs Learn about When they Learn about Multimodal Reasoning
arXiv:2510.01719v5 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Evaluation of multimodal reasoning models is typically reduced to a single accuracy score, implicitly treating reasoning as a unitary capability. We
arXiv:2510.01719v5 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Evaluation of multimodal reasoning models is typically reduced to a single accuracy score, implicitly treating reasoning as a unitary capability. We introduce MathLens, a benchmark of textbook-style geometry problems that exposes this assumption by operationally decomposing performance into perception, reasoning, and multimodal-specific components. Each problem is derived from a symbolic specification and accompanied by visual diagrams, text-only variants, multimodal questions, and targeted perceptual probes, enabling controlled measurement of each component. Using this decomposition, we show that common training strategies are associated with systematically different capability profiles that are invisible under aggregate accuracy. Across the models we study, reinforcement learning primarily improves perceptual grounding and robustness to diagram variation, while our analysis suggests that textual SFT yields gains through reflective reasoning. In contrast, as perception and reasoning improve, a growing fraction of remaining errors fall outside these components and are categorized as multimodal-specific. These results suggest that apparent progress in multimodal reasoning reflects shifting balances among subskills rather than uniform advancement, motivating evaluation beyond scalar accuracy.
Related
- SkillEval: Learning Interpretable Ability Profiles of LLMs via Cognitive Diagnosis Models
- SyncLoop: A Multimodal Dual-Loop Framework for Self-Improving Mathematical Reasoning
- Zero-Shot Mission-Level Evaluation for Aerial MLLM Agents
- OMHBench: Benchmarking Balanced and Grounded Omni-Modal Multi-Hop Reasoning
Source: arXiv cs.CL | 2026-10-26