← 研踪 PaperTrailACL Anthology · ACL 2026:acl:2026.acl-long.2124 · 记录 #1
Mind’s Eye: A Benchmark of Visual Abstraction, Transformation and Composition for Multimodal LLMs
来源日期（仅到月份） 2026-07
来源记录日期 2026-07
雷达观测 2026-11-01 21:46
摘要
Multimodal large language models (MLLMs) have achieved impressive progress on vision language benchmarks, yet their capacity for cognitive and psychological reasoning remains largely unexplored. We introduce Mind’s Eye, a multiple-choice benchmark of eight visuo-cognitive tasks inspired by classic human intelligence tests and organized under a novel A–R–T taxonomy: Abstraction, Relation, and Transformation. The tasks probe core processes of fluid intelligence such as pattern induction, analogical Relation mapping, and mental Transformation. We evaluate a diverse suite of closed-source and open-source MLLMs and compare their performance with human participants. Humans achieve 80% accuracy, while top performing MLLMs remain below 50%. Error analysis reveals failures in (i) visual attention allocation, (ii) internal perceptual manipulation, (iii) over reliance on domain priors, and (iv) weak abstraction of underlying visual concepts. Our findings suggest that current MLLMs exhibit limited fluid reasoning and visuo-cognitive integration compared with human participants, highlighting the need for cognitively grounded evaluation frameworks like Mind’s Eye.
论文发现出处
这些页面提供论文线索，不代表同行评审或质量认证。
观测到的版本
平台记录号代表本站观测到的元数据变化，不是作者修订号。来源日期仅到月份或年份时，按该月或该年首日存档。
记录 #1 · 2026-07 · 最新观测版本
Mind’s Eye: A Benchmark of Visual Abstraction, Transformation and Composition for Multimodal LLMs
Multimodal large language models (MLLMs) have achieved impressive progress on vision language benchmarks, yet their capacity for cognitive and psychological reasoning remains largely unexplored. We introduce Mind’s Eye, a multiple-choice benchmark of eight visuo-cognitive tasks inspired by classic human intelligence tests and organized under a novel A–R–T taxonomy: Abstraction, Relation, and Transformation. The tasks probe core processes of fluid intelligence such as pattern induction, analogical Relation mapping, and mental Transformation. We evaluate a diverse suite of closed-source and open-source MLLMs and compare their performance with human participants. Humans achieve 80% accuracy, while top performing MLLMs remain below 50%. Error analysis reveals failures in (i) visual attention allocation, (ii) internal perceptual manipulation, (iii) over reliance on domain priors, and (iv) weak abstraction of underlying visual concepts. Our findings suggest that current MLLMs exhibit limited fluid reasoning and visuo-cognitive integration compared with human participants, highlighting the need for cognitively grounded evaluation frameworks like Mind’s Eye.
查看此版本解读 →查看此版本原文 ↗