Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Xuanyu Chu
dblp:408/2583
· DBLP profile ↗
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 · 100% |
Topics — the 2 heaviest of 2, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Computer vision › Vision and language
multimodal reasoning |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | RBench-V: A Primary Assessment for Visual Reasoning Models with Multimodal Outputs · NeurIPS 2025 |
Computer vision › Vision and language › multimodal benchmark
visual reasoning benchmark |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | RBench-V: A Primary Assessment for Visual Reasoning Models with Multimodal Outputs · NeurIPS 2025 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
multimodal output generation · 0.9benchmark construction · 0.9
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | RBench-V: A Primary Assessment for Visual Reasoning Models with Multimodal OutputsabstractThe rapid advancement of native multi-modal models and omni-models, exemplified by GPT-4o, Gemini and o3 with their capability to process and generate content across modalities such as text and images, marks a significant milestone in the evolution of intelligence. Systematic evaluation of their multi-modal output capabilities in visual thinking process (a.k.a., multi-modal chain of thought, M-CoT) becomes critically important. However, existing benchmarks for evaluating multi-modal models primarily focus on assessing multi-modal inputs and text-only reasoning process while neglecting the importance of reasoning through multi-modal outputs. In this paper, we present a benchmark, dubbed as RBench-V, designed to assess models’ vision-indispensable reasoning. To conduct RBench-V, we carefully hand-pick 803 questions covering math, physics, counting and games. Unlike problems in previous benchmarks, which typically specify certain input modalities, RBench-V presents problems centered on multi-modal outputs, which require image manipulation, such as generating novel images and constructing auxiliary lines to support reasoning process. We evaluate numerous open- and closed-source models on RBench-V, including o3, Gemini 2.5 pro, Qwen2.5-VL, etc. Even the best-performing model, o3, achieves only 25.8% accuracy on RBench-V, far below the human score of 82.3%, which shows current models struggle to leverage multi-modal reasoning. Data and code are available at https://evalmodels.github.io/rbenchv. Menghao Guo 0001, Xuanyu Chu, Qianrui Yang, Zhe-Han Mo, Yiqing Shen 0005, Pei-lin Li, Xinjie Lin 0001, Jinnian Zhang, Xin-Sheng Chen, Yi Zhang 0099, Kiyohiro Nakayama, Zhengyang Geng, Houwen Peng, Han Hu 0001, Shi-Min Hu 0001 |
NeurIPS | 2 |