Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Jiaxi Song

dblp:384/1912 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2025
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1 · 1 since 2021

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Artificial intelligence
1 paper
Vision and language · 67% Language models and text generation · 33%

Topics — the 3 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation
large language model evaluation
0.912025
RBench: Graduate-level Multi-disciplinary Benchmarks for LLM & MLLM Complex Reasoning Evaluation · ICML 2025
Computer vision › Vision and language
multimodal evaluation
0.912025
RBench: Graduate-level Multi-disciplinary Benchmarks for LLM & MLLM Complex Reasoning Evaluation · ICML 2025
Computer vision › Vision and language › multimodal reasoning
multimodal reasoning benchmark
0.912025
RBench: Graduate-level Multi-disciplinary Benchmarks for LLM & MLLM Complex Reasoning Evaluation · ICML 2025

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

model evaluation · 0.9benchmark construction · 0.9
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2025 RBench: Graduate-level Multi-disciplinary Benchmarks for LLM & MLLM Complex Reasoning Evaluation
abstract
Reasoning stands as a cornerstone of intelligence, enabling the synthesis of existing knowledge to solve complex problems. Despite remarkable progress, existing reasoning benchmarks often fail to rigorously evaluate the nuanced reasoning capabilities required for complex, real-world problemsolving, particularly in multi-disciplinary and multimodal contexts. In this paper, we introduce a graduate-level, multi-disciplinary, EnglishChinese benchmark, dubbed as Reasoning Bench (RBench), for assessing the reasoning capability of both language and multimodal models. RBench spans 1,094 questions across 108 subjects for language model evaluation and 665 questions across 83 subjects for multimodal model testing. These questions are meticulously curated to ensure rigorous difficulty calibration, subject balance, and cross-linguistic alignment, enabling the assessment to be an Olympiad-level multidisciplinary benchmark. We evaluate many models such as o1, GPT-4o, DeepSeek-R1, etc. Experimental results indicate that advanced models perform poorly on complex reasoning, especially multimodal reasoning. Even the top-performing model OpenAI o1 achieves only 53.2% accuracy on our multimodal evaluation. Data and code are made publicly available athttps://evalmodels.github.io/rbench/
Menghao Guo 0001, Yi Zhang 0099, Jiaxi Song, Haoyang Peng, Yi-Xuan Deng, Xinzhi Dong, Kiyohiro Nakayama, Zhengyang Geng, Chen Wang 0049, Bolin Ni, Yongming Rao, Houwen Peng, Han Hu 0001, Gordon Wetzstein, Shi-Min Hu 0001
ICML4