arXiv:2411.00836cs.CVcs.AI2024-11ICLR被引 139

构建动态数学题库,测试视觉语言模型在变体题上的推理鲁棒性。

DynaMath: A Dynamic Visual Benchmark for Evaluating Mathematical Reasoning Robustness of Vision Language Models

  • 用可生成题目的代码模板构建动态数学题库
  • 14个顶尖模型在变体题上最差准确率远低于平均值
  • 适合研究模型泛化与鲁棒性的研究人员使用

视觉语言模型(VLMs)在涉及视觉上下文的数学推理任务中展现出巨大潜力。然而,我们发现当前最先进的模型如GPT-4o在问题仅作微小修改时会持续失败,暴露出其数学推理能力的局限性。现有视觉数学基准多为静态题目集,难以评估模型对变体问题的鲁棒性。为此,本文提出DynaMath,一个动态视觉数学基准,包含501个高质量、跨主题的种子问题,每个以Python程序表示,可自动生成5,010个具体变体题。该基准支持对模型在不同输入条件下表现的深入评估。我们测试了14个SOTA VLMs,结果表明:最差情况下的模型准确率(即同一种子题10种变体中正确回答的比例)显著低于平均准确率。分析强调了研究VLM推理鲁棒性的必要性,DynaMath为开发更可靠的数学推理模型提供了重要参考。

原文摘要 · Abstract (English)

The rapid advancements in Vision-Language Models (VLMs) have shown great potential in tackling mathematical reasoning tasks that involve visual context. Unlike humans who can reliably apply solution steps to similar problems with minor modifications, we found that SOTA VLMs like GPT-4o can consistently fail in these scenarios, revealing limitations in their mathematical reasoning capabilities. In this paper, we investigate the mathematical reasoning robustness in VLMs and evaluate how well these models perform under different variants of the same question, such as changes in visual numerical values or function graphs. While several vision-based math benchmarks have been developed to assess VLMs' problem-solving capabilities, these benchmarks contain only static sets of problems and cannot easily evaluate mathematical reasoning robustness. To fill this gap, we introduce DynaMath, a dynamic visual math benchmark designed for in-depth assessment of VLMs. DynaMath includes 501 high-quality, multi-topic seed questions, each represented as a Python program. Those programs are carefully designed and annotated to enable the automatic generation of a much larger set of concrete questions, including many different types of visual and textual variations. DynaMath allows us to evaluate the generalization ability of VLMs, by assessing their performance under varying input conditions of a seed question. We evaluated 14 SOTA VLMs with 5,010 generated concrete questions. Our results show that the worst-case model accuracy, defined as the percentage of correctly answered seed questions in all 10 variants, is significantly lower than the average-case accuracy. Our analysis emphasizes the need to study the robustness of VLMs' reasoning abilities, and DynaMath provides valuable insights to guide the development of more reliable models for mathematical reasoning.

数学推理视觉语言模型鲁棒性评测动态基准

Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品;中文卡片由大模型生成,请以原文为准。