Benchmarking Multimodal Large Language Models for Scientific Visualization Literacy

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2607.15176v2
• Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2026 18:15:34 GMT
• Title: Benchmarking Multimodal Large Language Models for Scientific Visualization Literacy
• Abstract summary: Multimodal large language models (MLLMs) are increasingly used to interpret visualizations.<n>We benchmark six MLLMs on the scientific visualization literacy assessment test.<n>Results show that current MLLMs do not exhibit uniform SciVis literacy.
• Score: 4.707083459088333
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
• Abstract: Multimodal large language models (MLLMs) are increasingly used to interpret visualizations, yet current evaluations remain largely chart-centric and provide limited evidence of understanding of scientific visualization (SciVis). We benchmark six MLLMs on the scientific visualization literacy assessment test, a standardized SciVis literacy assessment comprising 49 items based on 18 scientific visualizations and illustrations, spanning 8 techniques and 11 task types. We evaluate three closed-source and three open-source models under a closed-world protocol and compare their performance using data from 485 human participants. Results show that current MLLMs do not exhibit uniform SciVis literacy. Gemini is the strongest model overall, exceeding the human mean across the evaluated subsets, whereas the open-source models remain below the human baseline. Performance is highly uneven across techniques and tasks: models perform best on scientific illustration, search, and spatial understanding, but struggle on texture-based and integration-based visualizations and on quantitative estimation. Error analysis reveals recurring failures in fine-grained quantitative estimation, flow-direction interpretation, and grounded encoding interpretation. These findings position SciVis literacy as a necessary benchmark dimension for evaluating multimodal AI systems. Our code and model outputs are publicly available at https://github.com/patdmp/mllm-scivis-lit-benchmark.

Related papers

• Do MLLMs See What We See? Analyzing Visualization Literacy Barriers in AI Systems [23.262619529784185]
  We present the first systematic analysis of barriers to visualization literacy in Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs)<n>We open-coded 309 erroneous responses from four state-of-the-art models with a barrier-centric strategy adapted from human visualization literacy research.<n>Results show that models perform well on simple charts but struggle with color-intensive, segment-based visualizations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-18T21:08:23Z)
• PENDULUM: A Benchmark for Assessing Sycophancy in Multimodal Large Language Models [43.767942065379366]
  Sycophancy is a tendency of AI models to agree with user input at the expense of factual accuracy or in contradiction of visual evidence.<n>We introduce a comprehensive evaluation benchmark, textitPENDULUM, comprising approximately 2,000 human-curated Visual Question Answering pairs.<n>We observe substantial variability in model robustness and a pronounced susceptibility to sycophantic and hallucinatory behavior.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-22T12:49:12Z)
• MME-SCI: A Comprehensive and Challenging Science Benchmark for Multimodal Large Language Models [27.425377320206444]
  multimodal large language models (MLLMs) have achieved significant advancements across various domains.<n> benchmarks in the scientific domain have played an important role in assessing the reasoning capabilities of MLLMs.<n>Existing benchmarks still face three key challenges: 1) Insufficient evaluation of models' reasoning abilities in multilingual scenarios; 2) Inadequate assessment of MLLMs' comprehensive modality coverage; 3) Lack of fine-grained annotation of scientific knowledge points.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-19T15:27:55Z)
• SpatialViz-Bench: An MLLM Benchmark for Spatial Visualization [44.427830927596204]
  SpatialViz-Bench is a comprehensive benchmark for spatial visualization with 12 tasks across 4 sub-abilities, comprising 1,180 automatically generated problems.<n>Our evaluation of 33 state-of-the-art MLLMs reveals wide performance variations and uncovers counter-intuitive findings.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-10T10:27:20Z)
• VisuLogic: A Benchmark for Evaluating Visual Reasoning in Multi-modal Large Language Models [121.03333569013148]
  We introduce VisuLogic: a benchmark of 1,000 human-verified problems across six categories.<n>These types of questions can be evaluated to assess the visual reasoning capabilities of MLLMs from multiple perspectives.<n>Most models score below 30% accuracy-only slightly above the 25% random baseline and far below the 51.4% achieved by humans.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-21T17:59:53Z)
• VOILA: Evaluation of MLLMs For Perceptual Understanding and Analogical Reasoning [63.0285363282581]
  Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) have become a powerful tool for integrating visual and textual information.<n>We introduce VOILA, a benchmark designed to evaluate MLLMs' perceptual understanding and abstract relational reasoning.<n>We reveal that current MLLMs struggle to comprehend inter-image relationships and exhibit limited capabilities in high-level relational reasoning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-25T23:36:19Z)
• Human Cognitive Benchmarks Reveal Foundational Visual Gaps in MLLMs [65.93003087656754]
  VisFactor is a benchmark that digitizes 20 vision-centric subtests from a well-established cognitive psychology assessment.<n>We evaluate 20 frontier Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) from GPT, Gemini, Claude, LLaMA, Qwen, and SEED families.<n>The best-performing model achieves a score of only 25.19 out of 100, with consistent failures on tasks such as mental rotation, spatial relation inference, and figure-ground discrimination.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-23T04:21:32Z)
• Polymath: A Challenging Multi-modal Mathematical Reasoning Benchmark [53.61633384281524]
  PolyMATH is a benchmark aimed at evaluating the general cognitive reasoning abilities of MLLMs. The best scores achieved on PolyMATH are 41%, 36%, and 27%, obtained by Claude-3.5 Sonnet, GPT-4o and Gemini-1.5 Pro respectively. A further fine-grained error analysis reveals that these models struggle to understand spatial relations and perform drawn-out, high-level reasoning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-06T20:35:41Z)
• MMSci: A Dataset for Graduate-Level Multi-Discipline Multimodal Scientific Understanding [59.41495657570397]
  We present a comprehensive dataset compiled from Nature Communications articles covering 72 scientific fields.<n>We evaluated 19 proprietary and open-source models on two benchmark tasks, figure captioning and multiple-choice, and conducted human expert annotation.<n>Fine-tuning Qwen2-VL-7B with our task-specific data achieved better performance than GPT-4o and even human experts in multiple-choice evaluations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-06T00:40:53Z)
• CODIS: Benchmarking Context-Dependent Visual Comprehension for Multimodal Large Language Models [58.95889895912716]
  We introduce a new benchmark, named as CODIS, designed to assess the ability of models to use context provided in free-form text to enhance visual comprehension. Our findings indicate that MLLMs consistently fall short of human performance on this benchmark. This underscores the pressing need to enhance the ability of MLLMs to comprehend visuals in a context-dependent manner.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-21T08:21:12Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.