Xianghe Wang

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.

Rongjin Li, Zichen Tang, Xianghe Wang et al.

With the rapid progress of multimodal large language models (MLLMs), AI already performs well at literature retrieval and certain reasoning tasks, serving as a capable assistant to human researchers, yet it remains far from autonomous research. The fundamental reason is that current work on academic paper reasoning is largely confined to a search-oriented paradigm centered on pre-specified targets, with reasoning grounded in relevance retrieval, which struggles to support researcher-style full-document understanding, reasoning, and verification. To bridge this gap, we propose \textbf{ScholScan}, a new benchmark for academic paper reasoning. ScholScan introduces a scan-oriented task setting that asks models to read and cross-check entire papers like human researchers, scanning the document to identify consistency issues. The benchmark comprises 1,800 carefully annotated questions drawn from nine error categories across 13 natural-science domains and 715 papers, and provides detailed annotations for evidence localization and reasoning traces, together with a unified evaluation protocol. We assessed 15 models across 24 input configurations and conducted a fine-grained analysis of MLLM capabilities for all error categories. Across the board, retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) methods yield no significant improvements, revealing systematic deficiencies of current MLLMs on scan-oriented tasks and underscoring the challenge posed by ScholScan. We expect ScholScan to be the leading and representative work of the scan-oriented task paradigm.