Haolin Tian

CV
3papers
2citations
Novelty47%
AI Score42

3 Papers

82.0CVMar 26
THEMIS: Towards Holistic Evaluation of MLLMs for Scientific Paper Fraud Forensics

Tzu-Yen Ma, Bo Zhang, Zichen Tang et al. · princeton

We present THEMIS, a novel multi-task benchmark designed to comprehensively evaluate multimodal large language models (MLLMs) on visual fraud reasoning within real-world academic scenarios. Compared to existing benchmarks, THEMIS introduces three major advances. (1) Real-World Scenarios and Complexity: Our benchmark comprises over 4,000 questions spanning seven scenarios, derived from authentic retracted-paper cases and carefully curated multimodal synthetic data. With 60.47% complex-texture images, THEMIS bridges the critical gap between existing benchmarks and the complexity of real-world academic fraud. (2) Fraud-Type Diversity and Granularity: THEMIS systematically covers five challenging fraud types and introduces 16 fine-grained manipulation operations. On average, each sample undergoes multiple stacked manipulation operations, with the diversity and difficulty of these manipulations demanding a high level of visual fraud reasoning from the models. (3) Multi-Dimensional Capability Evaluation: We establish a mapping from fraud types to five core visual fraud reasoning capabilities, thereby enabling an evaluation that reveals the distinct strengths and specific weaknesses of different models across these core capabilities. Experiments on 16 leading MLLMs show that even the best-performing model, GPT-5, achieves an overall performance of only 56.15%, demonstrating that our benchmark presents a stringent test. We expect THEMIS to advance the development of MLLMs for complex, real-world fraud reasoning tasks.

CVDec 31, 2025
FinMMDocR: Benchmarking Financial Multimodal Reasoning with Scenario Awareness, Document Understanding, and Multi-Step Computation

Zichen Tang, Haihong E, Rongjin Li et al.

We introduce FinMMDocR, a novel bilingual multimodal benchmark for evaluating multimodal large language models (MLLMs) on real-world financial numerical reasoning. Compared to existing benchmarks, our work delivers three major advancements. (1) Scenario Awareness: 57.9% of 1,200 expert-annotated problems incorporate 12 types of implicit financial scenarios (e.g., Portfolio Management), challenging models to perform expert-level reasoning based on assumptions; (2) Document Understanding: 837 Chinese/English documents spanning 9 types (e.g., Company Research) average 50.8 pages with rich visual elements, significantly surpassing existing benchmarks in both breadth and depth of financial documents; (3) Multi-Step Computation: Problems demand 11-step reasoning on average (5.3 extraction + 5.7 calculation steps), with 65.0% requiring cross-page evidence (2.4 pages average). The best-performing MLLM achieves only 58.0% accuracy, and different retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) methods show significant performance variations on this task. We expect FinMMDocR to drive improvements in MLLMs and reasoning-enhanced methods on complex multimodal reasoning tasks in real-world scenarios.

76.0CVApr 30
Decoding Scientific Experimental Images: The SPUR Benchmark for Perception, Understanding, and Reasoning

Junpeng Ding, Zichen Tang, Haihong E et al.

We introduce SPUR, a comprehensive benchmark for scientific experimental image perception, understanding, and reasoning, comprising 4,264 question-answering (QA) pairs derived from 1,084 expert-curated images. SPUR features three key innovations: (1) Panel-Level Fine-Grained Perception: evaluating the visual perception of multimodal large language models (MLLMs) across three dimensions (numerical, morphological, and information localization) on six fine-grained panel types; (2) Cross-Panel Relation Understanding: utilizing complex images with an average of 14.3 panels per sample to evaluate MLLMs' ability to decipher intricate cross-panel relations; (3) Expert-Level Reasoning: assessment of qualitative and quantitative reasoning across five experimental paradigms to determine if models can infer conclusions from evidence as human experts do. Comprehensive evaluation of 20 MLLMs and four multimodal Chain-of-Thought (MCoT) methods reveals that current models fall significantly short of the expert-level requirements for scientific image interpretation, underscoring a critical bottleneck in AI for Science (AI4S) research.