Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 2 minor 1 cited by

SEAM: Semantically Equivalent Across Modalities Benchmark for Vision-Language Models

T0 review · 3 major / 2 minor · reviewed 2026-08-05 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read SEAM benchmark finds vision models consistently lag language on semantically equivalent tasks.

desk verdict SEAM is a well-motivated benchmark, but its core premise—semantic equivalence across notation systems—is asserted, not validated, so the headline finding is provisional. read the letter →

arxiv 2508.18179 v1 pith:AC2I3VWD submitted 2025-08-25 cs.AI cs.CV

Zhenwei Tang , Difan Jiao , Blair Yang , Ashton Anderson This is my paper
classification cs.AIcs.CV
keywords vision-languagemodelsmodalityimbalancebenchmarksemanticequivalencecross-modalreasoningvisual-spatialtextual-symbolichallucination
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper introduces SEAM, a benchmark built from pairs of problems that are meant to contain exactly the same information, one written in a standard symbolic notation and the other in a visual-spatial notation such as a diagram. Using these matched pairs, the paper measures whether vision-language models reason as well from pictures as from text. Across 21 contemporary models it finds a systematic gap: accuracy is higher on the textual form, and a given model often gives different answers to the two forms of the same problem. The authors trace the gap to perception failures in both modalities and show it survives visual transformations, so it is not a rendering artifact.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the SEAM item pair: a problem expressed in a standardized textual-symbolic notation (for example, an equation or symbolic expression) and in a matching visual-spatial notation (for example, a geometry or diagrammatic form). Because the two notations are different in kind, any accuracy difference between them cannot be explained by one being a photocopy of the other; the pair is designed to hold the semantic content fixed while changing only the modality, so the gap measures reasoning rather than information asymmetry.

What would settle it

Have a panel of human experts solve the same SEAM items in both forms; if their accuracy is also lower on the visual form by a similar margin, the two notations are not informationally equivalent and the reported model gap would not prove a modality reasoning deficit.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

SEAM's central claim is that contemporary vision-language models are not modality-agnostic: when the same problem is posed in text and in an equivalent visual form, models answer the text version correctly more often, and their two answers frequently disagree. The benchmark avoids the usual confound of OCR-style image-text pairs by using distinct notation systems for each modality, so the information content is intended to be identical rather than one being a picture of the other. The paper reports that across 21 models this vision-lags-language pattern is systematic, and error analysis identifies tokenization failures in domain notation for the textual side and visual perception failures th

Load-bearing premise

The textual and visual versions of each problem must carry exactly the same information, so any accuracy gap between them is due to modality, not to one version being easier.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the SEAM result holds, current VLMs are not modality-agnostic, and their visual reasoning is weaker than their textual reasoning on content-equivalent problems.
  • SEAM gives the field a controlled testbed for measuring modality-agnostic reasoning, so future models can be compared on the same semantically equivalent pairs.
  • The error analysis points to concrete improvement targets: fixing domain-notation tokenization for text and reducing visual hallucinations for images.
  • Robustness to visual transformations implies the modality gap is tied to semantic content and reasoning, not to how the image happens to be rendered.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If human performance on the same pairs reproduces the vision-lags-language gap, the equivalence assumption would be suspect and the benchmark would be measuring task difficulty rather than model bias.
  • Extending SEAM to other standardized notation pairs, such as musical scores or chemical structures, would test whether the modality imbalance generalizes beyond the four domains studied.
  • If the gap persists after improving visual encoders, the bottleneck may be cross-modal alignment rather than perception, implying that training should pair symbolic and visual formats explicitly.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper introduces SEAM, a benchmark of paired visual and textual inputs that are intended to be semantically equivalent across four domains with standardized notation. It evaluates 21 contemporary vision-language models, reporting a systematic modality imbalance (vision lagging language), low cross-modal agreement, and robustness to visual transformations. The central claim is that SEAM enables a controlled, semantically equivalent comparison of textual-symbolic versus visual-spatial reasoning, isolating modality effects from content differences.

Significance. If the equivalence claim is validated, SEAM addresses a well-known confound in VLM evaluation—the asymmetric information between text and images—and would be a useful tool for measuring modality-agnostic reasoning. The breadth across 21 models and the attention to visual transformations are strengths. However, the evidence for the central premise is not reported in the abstract; the benchmark's value and the interpretation of the empirical results depend on an independent demonstration of semantic equivalence.

major comments (3)
  1. [Abstract, 'semantically equivalent inputs'] The central assumption of information equivalence is asserted but not demonstrated. The abstract contrasts SEAM with OCR-based pairing and claims the inputs are semantically equivalent, yet no construction protocol, human rating, inversion check, or information-theoretic measure is reported. If the visual notation carries extra spatial cues (e.g., implicit geometric relations) or the textual notation is more compact or less ambiguous, the observed 'vision frequently lags language' could be a task-difficulty artifact. The manuscript must describe how equivalence was established independently of model performance and provide validation evidence, or substantially qualify the interpretation of the modality gap.
  2. [Abstract, 'vision frequently lags language' and 'cross-modal agreement relatively low'] These aggregate claims are based on 21 models, but no effect sizes, confidence intervals, or paired significance tests are reported. Since the same models are evaluated on matched content, paired statistical comparisons are straightforward and should be given. The manuscript should also specify the evaluation metric (accuracy, calibration, etc.), how ties are handled, and how the 'largely robust to visual transformations' claim is supported, including the list of transformations and statistical controls.
  3. [Abstract, error analysis] The error analysis attributes the modality gap to two factors: textual perception failures from tokenization and visual perception failures inducing hallucinations. No coding methodology, inter-rater reliability, or concrete examples are provided. Without a systematic and falsifiable error taxonomy, this explanation cannot be assessed. The full manuscript should describe the error annotation process, operational definitions, and example items.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract, 'OCR-based image-text pairing'] This term is not defined. Briefly explain what OCR-based pairing means and how SEAM's notation-based pairing differs from it, especially for readers not familiar with existing VLM benchmarks.
  2. [General] For a benchmark paper, consider explicitly stating a plan to release the benchmark instances, construction code, and evaluation scripts to facilitate independent validation of the equivalence claim.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity; the paper reports an empirical benchmark result rather than deriving its conclusion from its own assumptions.

full rationale

The paper's primary claim is an empirical measurement: across 21 models, vision frequently lags language on paired inputs that the authors constructed to be semantically equivalent. This is not a derivation from the definition of the benchmark; it is an observed outcome, and nothing in the abstract indicates that the observed modality gap is forced by construction or by a fitted parameter renamed as a prediction. The load-bearing premise of semantic equivalence is asserted rather than independently verified, but an unvalidated assumption is not circularity under the stated criteria. No equations, fitted parameters, or self-citation chains are present in the available evidence to show that any result reduces to its own inputs. The 'semantically equivalent' characterization is a design assumption, not a result derived from the measurements; even if it were false, the appropriate critique would be construct validity or task-difficulty confounding, not circular reasoning. Because the available manuscript text contains no specific reduction of a claimed derivation to its inputs, the circularity score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 1 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central design assumption is the semantic equivalence of paired inputs. No free parameters or invented entities are disclosed in the abstract.

assumptions (1)
  • domain assumption Paired textual and visual notations are semantically equivalent.
    The benchmark design relies on the assumption that the same information is conveyed exactly in both modalities. This is stated in the abstract: 'pairs semantically equivalent inputs across four domains that have existing standardized textual and visual notations.'

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of SEAM: Semantically Equivalent Across Modalities Benchmark for Vision-Language Models." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/AC2I3VWD

@misc{pith2026250818179,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: SEAM: Semantically Equivalent Across Modalities Benchmark for Vision-Language Models},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/AC2I3VWD}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2508.18179}
}
read the original abstract

Evaluating whether vision-language models (VLMs) reason consistently across representations is challenging because modality comparisons are typically confounded by task differences and asymmetric information. We introduce SEAM, a benchmark that pairs semantically equivalent inputs across four domains that have existing standardized textual and visual notations. By employing distinct notation systems across modalities, in contrast to OCR-based image-text pairing, SEAM provides a rigorous comparative assessment of the textual-symbolic and visual-spatial reasoning capabilities of VLMs. Across 21 contemporary models, we observe systematic modality imbalance: vision frequently lags language in overall performance, despite the problems containing semantically equivalent information, and cross-modal agreement is relatively low. Our error analysis reveals two main drivers: textual perception failures from tokenization in domain notation and visual perception failures that induce hallucinations. We also show that our results are largely robust to visual transformations. SEAM establishes a controlled, semantically equivalent setting for measuring and improving modality-agnostic reasoning.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. TokenSwap: Benchmarking and Reducing the Modality Gap in Multimodal LLMs

    cs.CL 2026-05 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    TokenSwap measures and mitigates the MLLM modality gap: swapping textual concepts for matched images lowers accuracy by 4-47% across 42 models, and training with such swaps reduces the gap.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

121 extracted references · 27 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Pixtral 12b

    Pravesh Agrawal, Szymon Antoniak, Emma Bou Hanna, Baptiste Bout, Devendra Chaplot, Jessica Chudnovsky, Diogo Costa, Baudouin De Monicault, Saurabh Garg, Theophile Gervet, et al. Pixtral 12b. arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.07073, 2024

    arXiv 2024

  2. [2]

    Flamingo: a visual language model for few-shot learning

    Jean-Baptiste Alayrac, Jeff Donahue, Pauline Luc, Antoine Miech, Iain Barr, Yana Hasson, Karel Lenc, Arthur Mensch, Katherine Millican, Malcolm Reynolds, et al. Flamingo: a visual language model for few-shot learning. Advances in neural information processing systems, 35: 0 23716--23736, 2022

    2022

  3. [3]

    The claude 3 model family: Opus, sonnet, haiku, 2024

    Anthropic. The claude 3 model family: Opus, sonnet, haiku, 2024. URL https://assets.anthropic.com/m/61e7d27f8c8f5919/original/Claude-3-Model-Card.pdf

    2024

  4. [4]

    Claude 3.7 sonnet system card, 2025 a

    Anthropic. Claude 3.7 sonnet system card, 2025 a . URL https://anthropic.com/claude-3-7-sonnet-system-card

    2025

  5. [5]

    System card: Claude opus 4 & claude sonnet 4, 2025 b

    Anthropic. System card: Claude opus 4 & claude sonnet 4, 2025 b . URL https://www-cdn.anthropic.com/4263b940cabb546aa0e3283f35b686f4f3b2ff47.pdf

    2025

  6. [6]

    Vqa: Visual question answering

    Stanislaw Antol, Aishwarya Agrawal, Jiasen Lu, Margaret Mitchell, Dhruv Batra, C Lawrence Zitnick, and Devi Parikh. Vqa: Visual question answering. In Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on computer vision, pp.\ 2425--2433, 2015

    2015

  7. [7]

    Openflamingo: An open-source framework for training large autoregressive vision-language models

    Anas Awadalla, Irena Gao, Josh Gardner, Jack Hessel, Yusuf Hanafy, Wanrong Zhu, Kalyani Marathe, Yonatan Bitton, Samir Gadre, Shiori Sagawa, et al. Openflamingo: An open-source framework for training large autoregressive vision-language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2308.01390, 2023

    arXiv 2023

  8. [8]

    Qwen technical report

    Jinze Bai, Shuai Bai, Yunfei Chu, Zeyu Cui, Kai Dang, Xiaodong Deng, Yang Fan, Wenbin Ge, Yu Han, Fei Huang, et al. Qwen technical report. arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.16609, 2023

    arXiv 2023

Show all 121 references
  1. [9]

    Shuai Bai, Keqin Chen, Xuejing Liu, Jialin Wang, Wenbin Ge, Sibo Song, Kai Dang, Peng Wang, Shijie Wang, Jun Tang, et al. Qwen2. 5-vl technical report. arXiv preprint arXiv:2502.13923, 2025

    2025 arXiv

  2. [10]

    Minigpt-v2: large language model as a unified interface for vision-language multi-task learning

    Jun Chen, Deyao Zhu, Xiaoqian Shen, Xiang Li, Zechun Liu, Pengchuan Zhang, Raghuraman Krishnamoorthi, Vikas Chandra, Yunyang Xiong, and Mohamed Elhoseiny. Minigpt-v2: large language model as a unified interface for vision-language multi-task learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2310...

    2023 arXiv

  3. [11]

    Uniter: Universal image-text representation learning

    Yen-Chun Chen, Linjie Li, Licheng Yu, Ahmed El Kholy, Faisal Ahmed, Zhe Gan, Yu Cheng, and Jingjing Liu. Uniter: Universal image-text representation learning. In European conference on computer vision, pp.\ 104--120. Springer, 2020

    2020

  4. [12]

    Expanding performance boundaries of open-source multimodal models with model, data, and test-time scaling

    Zhe Chen, Weiyun Wang, Yue Cao, Yangzhou Liu, Zhangwei Gao, Erfei Cui, Jinguo Zhu, Shenglong Ye, Hao Tian, Zhaoyang Liu, et al. Expanding performance boundaries of open-source multimodal models with model, data, and test-time scaling. arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.05271, 2024 a

    2024 arXiv

  5. [13]

    How far are we to gpt-4v? closing the gap to commercial multimodal models with open-source suites

    Zhe Chen, Weiyun Wang, Hao Tian, Shenglong Ye, Zhangwei Gao, Erfei Cui, Wenwen Tong, Kongzhi Hu, Jiapeng Luo, Zheng Ma, et al. How far are we to gpt-4v? closing the gap to commercial multimodal models with open-source suites. Science China Information Sciences, 67 0 (12): 0 22...

    2024

  6. [14]

    Internvl: Scaling up vision foundation models and aligning for generic visual-linguistic tasks

    Zhe Chen, Jiannan Wu, Wenhai Wang, Weijie Su, Guo Chen, Sen Xing, Muyan Zhong, Qinglong Zhang, Xizhou Zhu, Lewei Lu, et al. Internvl: Scaling up vision foundation models and aligning for generic visual-linguistic tasks. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vis...

    2024

  7. [15]

    Chess.com, 2025

    Chess.com . Chess.com, 2025. URL https://www.chess.com/. Accessed: March 2025

    2025

  8. [16]

    Gemini 2.5: Pushing the frontier with advanced reasoning, multimodality, long context, and next generation agentic capabilities

    Gheorghe Comanici, Eric Bieber, Mike Schaekermann, Ice Pasupat, Noveen Sachdeva, Inderjit Dhillon, Marcel Blistein, Ori Ram, Dan Zhang, Evan Rosen, et al. Gemini 2.5: Pushing the frontier with advanced reasoning, multimodality, long context, and next generation agentic capabil...

    2025 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Opencompass: A universal evaluation platform for foundation models

    OpenCompass Contributors. Opencompass: A universal evaluation platform for foundation models. https://github.com/open-compass/opencompass, 2023

    2023

  10. [18]

    Holistic analysis of hallucination in gpt-4v (ision): Bias and interference challenges

    Chenhang Cui, Yiyang Zhou, Xinyu Yang, Shirley Wu, Linjun Zhang, James Zou, and Huaxiu Yao. Holistic analysis of hallucination in gpt-4v (ision): Bias and interference challenges. arXiv preprint arXiv:2311.03287, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  11. [19]

    music21: A toolkit for computer-aided musicology and symbolic music analysis

    Michael Scott Cuthbert and Christopher Ariza. music21: A toolkit for computer-aided musicology and symbolic music analysis. In 11th International Society for Music Information Retrieval Conference, pp.\ 637--642, 2010

    2010

  12. [20]

    Instructblip: Towards general-purpose vision-language models with instruction tuning, 2023

    Wenliang Dai, Junnan Li, Dongxu Li, Anthony Meng Huat Tiong, Junqi Zhao, Weisheng Wang, Boyang Li, Pascale Fung, and Steven Hoi. Instructblip: Towards general-purpose vision-language models with instruction tuning, 2023. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2305.06500

    2023 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Gemini: a family of highly capable multimodal models

    Google DeepMind. Gemini: a family of highly capable multimodal models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2312.11805, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Gemini 1.5: Unlocking multimodal understanding across millions of tokens of context

    Google DeepMind. Gemini 1.5: Unlocking multimodal understanding across millions of tokens of context. arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.05530, 2024 a

    2024 arXiv

  15. [23]

    Gemma: Open models based on gemini research and technology

    Google DeepMind. Gemma: Open models based on gemini research and technology. arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.08295, 2024 b

    2024 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Gemma 2: Improving open language models at a practical size

    Google DeepMind. Gemma 2: Improving open language models at a practical size. arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.00118, 2024 c

    2024 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Introducing gemini 2.0: our new ai model for the agentic era, 2025 a

    Google DeepMind. Introducing gemini 2.0: our new ai model for the agentic era, 2025 a . URL https://blog.google/technology/google-deepmind/google-gemini-ai-update-december-2024/

    2025

  18. [26]

    Gemma 3 technical report, 2025 b

    Google DeepMind. Gemma 3 technical report, 2025 b . URL https://storage.googleapis.com/deepmind-media/gemma/Gemma3Report.pdf

    2025

  19. [27]

    Portable game notation specification and implementation guide, 1994

    Steven J Edwards. Portable game notation specification and implementation guide, 1994. Chess programming standard

    1994

  20. [28]

    Pmr: Prototypical modal rebalance for multimodal learning

    Yunfeng Fan, Wenchao Xu, Haozhao Wang, Junxiao Wang, and Song Guo. Pmr: Prototypical modal rebalance for multimodal learning. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pp.\ 20029--20038, 2023

    2023

  21. [29]

    Layoutgpt: Compositional visual planning and generation with large language models

    Weixi Feng, Wanrong Zhu, Tsu-jui Fu, Varun Jampani, Arjun Akula, Xuehai He, Sugato Basu, Xin Eric Wang, and William Yang Wang. Layoutgpt: Compositional visual planning and generation with large language models. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 36: 0 18225--18...

    2023

  22. [30]

    python-chess: A chess library for python, 2025

    Niklas Fiekas. python-chess: A chess library for python, 2025. URL https://python-chess.readthedocs.io/. Accessed: March 2025

    2025

  23. [31]

    Blink: Multimodal large language models can see but not perceive

    Xingyu Fu, Yushi Hu, Bangzheng Li, Yu Feng, Haoyu Wang, Xudong Lin, Dan Roth, Noah A Smith, Wei-Chiu Ma, and Ranjay Krishna. Blink: Multimodal large language models can see but not perceive. In European Conference on Computer Vision, pp.\ 148--166. Springer, 2024

    2024

  24. [32]

    Llama-adapter v2: Parameter-efficient visual instruction model

    Peng Gao, Jiaming Han, Renrui Zhang, Ziyi Lin, Shijie Geng, Aojun Zhou, Wei Zhang, Pan Lu, Conghui He, Xiangyu Yue, et al. Llama-adapter v2: Parameter-efficient visual instruction model. arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.15010, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Making the v in vqa matter: Elevating the role of image understanding in visual question answering

    Yash Goyal, Tejas Khot, Douglas Summers-Stay, Dhruv Batra, and Devi Parikh. Making the v in vqa matter: Elevating the role of image understanding in visual question answering. In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pp.\ 6904--6913, 2017

    2017

  26. [34]

    The llama 3 herd of models

    Aaron Grattafiori, Abhimanyu Dubey, Abhinav Jauhri, Abhinav Pandey, Abhishek Kadian, Ahmad Al-Dahle, Aiesha Letman, Akhil Mathur, Alan Schelten, Alex Vaughan, et al. The llama 3 herd of models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.21783, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  27. [35]

    What can large language models do in chemistry? a comprehensive benchmark on eight tasks

    Taicheng Guo, Bozhao Nan, Zhenwen Liang, Zhichun Guo, Nitesh Chawla, Olaf Wiest, Xiangliang Zhang, et al. What can large language models do in chemistry? a comprehensive benchmark on eight tasks. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 36: 0 59662--59688, 2023

    2023

  28. [36]

    Exploring network structure, dynamics, and function using networkx

    Aric Hagberg, Daniel Schult, and Pieter Swart. Exploring network structure, dynamics, and function using networkx. In Proceedings of the 7th Python in Science Conference, pp.\ 11--15, 2008

    2008

  29. [37]

    Chartllama: A multimodal llm for chart understanding and generation

    Yucheng Han, Chi Zhang, Xin Chen, Xu Yang, Zhibin Wang, Gang Yu, Bin Fu, and Hanwang Zhang. Chartllama: A multimodal llm for chart understanding and generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2311.16483, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  30. [38]

    Can mllms reason in multimodality? emma: An enhanced multimodal reasoning benchmark

    Yunzhuo Hao, Jiawei Gu, Huichen Will Wang, Linjie Li, Zhengyuan Yang, Lijuan Wang, and Yu Cheng. Can mllms reason in multimodality? emma: An enhanced multimodal reasoning benchmark. arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.05444, 2025

    2025 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Deciphering cross-modal alignment in large vision-language models with modality integration rate

    Qidong Huang, Xiaoyi Dong, Pan Zhang, Yuhang Zang, Yuhang Cao, Jiaqi Wang, Dahua Lin, Weiming Zhang, and Nenghai Yu. Deciphering cross-modal alignment in large vision-language models with modality integration rate. arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.07167, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Modality competition: What makes joint training of multi-modal network fail in deep learning?(provably)

    Yu Huang, Junyang Lin, Chang Zhou, Hongxia Yang, and Longbo Huang. Modality competition: What makes joint training of multi-modal network fail in deep learning?(provably). In International conference on machine learning, pp.\ 9226--9259. PMLR, 2022

    2022

  33. [41]

    Mantis: Interleaved multi-image instruction tuning

    Dongfu Jiang, Xuan He, Huaye Zeng, Cong Wei, Max Ku, Qian Liu, and Wenhu Chen. Mantis: Interleaved multi-image instruction tuning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.01483, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Spin: Sparsifying and integrating internal neurons in large language models for text classification

    Difan Jiao, Yilun Liu, Zhenwei Tang, Daniel Matter, J \"u rgen Pfeffer, and Ashton Anderson. Spin: Sparsifying and integrating internal neurons in large language models for text classification. In Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics ACL 2024, pp.\ 4666--4...

    2024

  35. [43]

    Pubchem 2025 update

    Sunghwan Kim, Jie Chen, Tiejun Cheng, Asta Gindulyte, Jia He, Siqian He, Qingliang Li, Benjamin A Shoemaker, Paul A Thiessen, Bo Yu, et al. Pubchem 2025 update. Nucleic Acids Research, 53 0 (D1): 0 D1516--D1525, 2025

    2025

  36. [44]

    Large language models are zero-shot reasoners

    Takeshi Kojima, Shixiang Shane Gu, Machel Reid, Yutaka Matsuo, and Yusuke Iwasawa. Large language models are zero-shot reasoners. Advances in neural information processing systems, 35: 0 22199--22213, 2022

    2022

  37. [45]

    Learning multiple layers of features from tiny images

    Alex Krizhevsky, Geoffrey Hinton, et al. Learning multiple layers of features from tiny images. 2009

    2009

  38. [46]

    Gonzalez, Hao Zhang, and Ion Stoica

    Woosuk Kwon, Zhuohan Li, Siyuan Zhuang, Ying Sheng, Lianmin Zheng, Cody Hao Yu, Joseph E. Gonzalez, Hao Zhang, and Ion Stoica. Efficient memory management for large language model serving with pagedattention. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGOPS 29th Symposium on Operating Systems...

    2023

  39. [47]

    Snap: A general-purpose network analysis and graph-mining library

    Jure Leskovec and Rok Sosi c . Snap: A general-purpose network analysis and graph-mining library. ACM Transactions on Intelligent Systems and Technology (TIST), 8 0 (1): 0 1--20, 2016

    2016

  40. [48]

    Llava-onevision: Easy visual task transfer

    Bo Li, Yuanhan Zhang, Dong Guo, Renrui Zhang, Feng Li, Hao Zhang, Kaichen Zhang, Yanwei Li, Ziwei Liu, and Chunyuan Li. Llava-onevision: Easy visual task transfer. arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.03326, 2024 a

    2024 arXiv

  41. [49]

    Seed-bench: Benchmarking multimodal large language models

    Bohao Li, Yuying Ge, Yixiao Ge, Guangzhi Wang, Rui Wang, Ruimao Zhang, and Ying Shan. Seed-bench: Benchmarking multimodal large language models. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pp.\ 13299--13308, 2024 b

    2024

  42. [50]

    Llava-next-interleave: Tackling multi-image, video, and 3d in large multimodal models

    Feng Li, Renrui Zhang, Hao Zhang, Yuanhan Zhang, Bo Li, Wei Li, Zejun Ma, and Chunyuan Li. Llava-next-interleave: Tackling multi-image, video, and 3d in large multimodal models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.07895, 2024 c

    2024 arXiv

  43. [51]

    Blip: Bootstrapping language-image pre-training for unified vision-language understanding and generation

    Junnan Li, Dongxu Li, Caiming Xiong, and Steven Hoi. Blip: Bootstrapping language-image pre-training for unified vision-language understanding and generation. In International conference on machine learning, pp.\ 12888--12900. PMLR, 2022

    2022

  44. [52]

    Blip-2: Bootstrapping language-image pre-training with frozen image encoders and large language models

    Junnan Li, Dongxu Li, Silvio Savarese, and Steven Hoi. Blip-2: Bootstrapping language-image pre-training with frozen image encoders and large language models. In International conference on machine learning, pp.\ 19730--19742. PMLR, 2023

    2023

  45. [53]

    Oscar: Object-semantics aligned pre-training for vision-language tasks

    Xiujun Li, Xi Yin, Chunyuan Li, Pengchuan Zhang, Xiaowei Hu, Lei Zhang, Lijuan Wang, Houdong Hu, Li Dong, Furu Wei, et al. Oscar: Object-semantics aligned pre-training for vision-language tasks. In Computer Vision--ECCV 2020: 16th European Conference, Glasgow, UK, August 23--2...

    2020

  46. [54]

    Lichess evaluation database, 2025 a

    Lichess Team . Lichess evaluation database, 2025 a . URL https://database.lichess.org/#evals. Accessed: March 2025

    2025

  47. [55]

    Lichess: Free online chess, 2025 b

    Lichess Team . Lichess: Free online chess, 2025 b . URL https://lichess.org/. Accessed: March 2025

    2025

  48. [56]

    Lichess puzzle database, 2025 c

    Lichess Team . Lichess puzzle database, 2025 c . URL https://database.lichess.org/#puzzles. Accessed: March 2025

    2025

  49. [57]

    Microsoft coco: Common objects in context

    Tsung-Yi Lin, Michael Maire, Serge Belongie, James Hays, Pietro Perona, Deva Ramanan, Piotr Doll \'a r, and C Lawrence Zitnick. Microsoft coco: Common objects in context. In Computer vision--ECCV 2014: 13th European conference, zurich, Switzerland, September 6-12, 2014, procee...

    2014

  50. [58]

    Hallusionbench: You see what you think? or you think what you see? an image-context reasoning benchmark challenging for gpt-4v (ision), llava-1.5, and other multi-modality models

    Fuxiao Liu, Tianrui Guan, Zongxia Li, Lichang Chen, Yaser Yacoob, Dinesh Manocha, and Tianyi Zhou. Hallusionbench: You see what you think? or you think what you see? an image-context reasoning benchmark challenging for gpt-4v (ision), llava-1.5, and other multi-modality models...

    2023 arXiv

  51. [59]

    Improved baselines with visual instruction tuning, 2023 b

    Haotian Liu, Chunyuan Li, Yuheng Li, and Yong Jae Lee. Improved baselines with visual instruction tuning, 2023 b

    2023

  52. [60]

    Visual instruction tuning, 2023 c

    Haotian Liu, Chunyuan Li, Qingyang Wu, and Yong Jae Lee. Visual instruction tuning, 2023 c

    2023

  53. [61]

    Llava-next: Improved reasoning, ocr, and world knowledge, January 2024 a

    Haotian Liu, Chunyuan Li, Yuheng Li, Bo Li, Yuanhan Zhang, Sheng Shen, and Yong Jae Lee. Llava-next: Improved reasoning, ocr, and world knowledge, January 2024 a . URL https://llava-vl.github.io/blog/2024-01-30-llava-next/

    2024

  54. [62]

    Mmbench: Is your multi-modal model an all-around player? In European conference on computer vision, pp.\ 216--233

    Yuan Liu, Haodong Duan, Yuanhan Zhang, Bo Li, Songyang Zhang, Wangbo Zhao, Yike Yuan, Jiaqi Wang, Conghui He, Ziwei Liu, et al. Mmbench: Is your multi-modal model an all-around player? In European conference on computer vision, pp.\ 216--233. Springer, 2024 b

    2024

  55. [63]

    Vilbert: Pretraining task-agnostic visiolinguistic representations for vision-and-language tasks

    Jiasen Lu, Dhruv Batra, Devi Parikh, and Stefan Lee. Vilbert: Pretraining task-agnostic visiolinguistic representations for vision-and-language tasks. Advances in neural information processing systems, 32, 2019

    2019

  56. [64]

    Mathvista: Evaluating mathematical reasoning of foundation models in visual contexts

    Pan Lu, Hritik Bansal, Tony Xia, Jiacheng Liu, Chunyuan Li, Hannaneh Hajishirzi, Hao Cheng, Kai-Wei Chang, Michel Galley, and Jianfeng Gao. Mathvista: Evaluating mathematical reasoning of foundation models in visual contexts. arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.02255, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  57. [65]

    Ok-vqa: A visual question answering benchmark requiring external knowledge

    Kenneth Marino, Mohammad Rastegari, Ali Farhadi, and Roozbeh Mottaghi. Ok-vqa: A visual question answering benchmark requiring external knowledge. In Proceedings of the IEEE/cvf conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pp.\ 3195--3204, 2019

    2019

  58. [66]

    Gpt-4v(ision) system card, 2023

    OpenAI. Gpt-4v(ision) system card, 2023. URL https://cdn.openai.com/papers/GPTV_System_Card.pdf

    2023

  59. [67]

    Gpt-4o system card

    OpenAI. Gpt-4o system card. arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.21276, 2024 a

    2024 arXiv

  60. [68]

    Gpt-4o mini: Advancing cost-efficient intelligence, 2024 b

    OpenAI. Gpt-4o mini: Advancing cost-efficient intelligence, 2024 b . URL https://openai.com/index/gpt-4o-mini-advancing-cost-efficient-intelligence/

    2024

  61. [69]

    Openai o1 system card, December 2024 c

    OpenAI. Openai o1 system card, December 2024 c . URL https://cdn.openai.com/o1-system-card-20241205.pdf

    2024

  62. [70]

    Gpt-4.5 system card, 2025 a

    OpenAI. Gpt-4.5 system card, 2025 a . URL https://cdn.openai.com/gpt-4-5-system-card-2272025.pdf

    2025

  63. [71]

    Gpt-5 system card, 2025 b

    OpenAI. Gpt-5 system card, 2025 b . URL https://cdn.openai.com/pdf/8124a3ce-ab78-4f06-96eb-49ea29ffb52f/gpt5-system-card-aug7.pdf

    2025

  64. [72]

    Openai o3-mini system card, February 2025 c

    OpenAI. Openai o3-mini system card, February 2025 c . URL https://cdn.openai.com/o3-mini-system-card-feb10.pdf

    2025

  65. [73]

    Openai o3 and o4-mini system card, 2025 d

    OpenAI. Openai o3 and o4-mini system card, 2025 d . URL https://cdn.openai.com/pdf/2221c875-02dc-4789-800b-e7758f3722c1/o3-and-o4-mini-system-card.pdf

    2025

  66. [74]

    Cross-modal attention congruence regularization for vision-language relation alignment

    Rohan Pandey, Rulin Shao, Paul Pu Liang, Ruslan Salakhutdinov, and Louis-Philippe Morency. Cross-modal attention congruence regularization for vision-language relation alignment. arXiv preprint arXiv:2212.10549, 2022

    2022 arXiv

  67. [75]

    Generalizing from simple to hard visual reasoning: Can we mitigate modality imbalance in vlms? arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.02669, 2025

    Simon Park, Abhishek Panigrahi, Yun Cheng, Dingli Yu, Anirudh Goyal, and Sanjeev Arora. Generalizing from simple to hard visual reasoning: Can we mitigate modality imbalance in vlms? arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.02669, 2025

    2025 arXiv

  68. [76]

    Balanced multimodal learning via on-the-fly gradient modulation

    Xiaokang Peng, Yake Wei, Andong Deng, Dong Wang, and Di Hu. Balanced multimodal learning via on-the-fly gradient modulation. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pp.\ 8238--8247, 2022

    2022

  69. [77]

    Rdkit: Open-source cheminformatics, 2025

    RDKit Development Team . Rdkit: Open-source cheminformatics, 2025. URL https://www.rdkit.org/. Accessed: March 2025

    2025

  70. [78]

    The music encoding initiative (mei)

    Perry Roland. The music encoding initiative (mei). In Proceedings of the First International Conference on Musical Applications Using XML, volume 1060, pp.\ 55--59. Citeseer, 2002

    2002

  71. [79]

    Music abc notation with music theory dataset, 2025

    Seeker38. Music abc notation with music theory dataset, 2025. URL https://huggingface.co/datasets/Seeker38/music_abc_notation_with_music_theory. Accessed: March 2025

    2025

  72. [80]

    Lxmert: Learning cross-modality encoder representations from transformers

    Hao Tan and Mohit Bansal. Lxmert: Learning cross-modality encoder representations from transformers. arXiv preprint arXiv:1908.07490, 2019

    1908 arXiv

  73. [81]

    Nota: Multimodal music notation understanding for visual large language model

    Mingni Tang, Jiajia Li, Lu Yang, Zhiqiang Zhang, Jinghao Tian, Zuchao Li, Lefei Zhang, and Ping Wang. Nota: Multimodal music notation understanding for visual large language model. arXiv preprint arXiv:2502.14893, 2025

    2025 arXiv

  74. [82]

    Cambrian-1: A fully open, vision-centric exploration of multimodal llms

    Peter Tong, Ellis Brown, Penghao Wu, Sanghyun Woo, Adithya Jairam Vedagiri IYER, Sai Charitha Akula, Shusheng Yang, Jihan Yang, Manoj Middepogu, Ziteng Wang, et al. Cambrian-1: A fully open, vision-centric exploration of multimodal llms. Advances in Neural Information Processi...

    2024

  75. [83]

    Llama: Open and efficient foundation language models

    Hugo Touvron, Thibaut Lavril, Gautier Izacard, Xavier Martinet, Marie-Anne Lachaux, Timoth \'e e Lacroix, Baptiste Rozi \`e re, Naman Goyal, Eric Hambro, Faisal Azhar, et al. Llama: Open and efficient foundation language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.13971, 2023 a

    2023 arXiv

  76. [84]

    Llama 2: Open foundation and fine-tuned chat models

    Hugo Touvron, Louis Martin, Kevin Stone, Peter Albert, Amjad Almahairi, Yasmine Babaei, Nikolay Bashlykov, Soumya Batra, Prajjwal Bhargava, Shruti Bhosale, et al. Llama 2: Open foundation and fine-tuned chat models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.09288, 2023 b

    2023 arXiv

  77. [85]

    Towards generalist biomedical ai

    Tao Tu, Shekoofeh Azizi, Danny Driess, Mike Schaekermann, Mohamed Amin, Pi-Chuan Chang, Andrew Carroll, Charles Lau, Ryutaro Tanno, Ira Ktena, et al. Towards generalist biomedical ai. Nejm Ai, 1 0 (3): 0 AIoa2300138, 2024

    2024

  78. [86]

    Visualizing data using t-sne

    Laurens Van der Maaten and Geoffrey Hinton. Visualizing data using t-sne. Journal of machine learning research, 9 0 (11), 2008

    2008

  79. [87]

    Limca: Llm for automating analog in-memory computing architecture design exploration

    Deepak Vungarala, Md Hasibul Amin, Pietro Mercati, Arnob Ghosh, Arman Roohi, Ramtin Zand, and Shaahin Angizi. Limca: Llm for automating analog in-memory computing architecture design exploration. arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.13301, 2025

    2025 arXiv

  80. [88]

    Abc notation standard, 2004

    Chris Walshaw. Abc notation standard, 2004. URL http://abcnotation.com/. Music notation standard

    2004

  81. [89]

    Is a picture worth a thousand words? delving into spatial reasoning for vision language models

    Jiayu Wang, Yifei Ming, Zhenmei Shi, Vibhav Vineet, Xin Wang, Sharon Li, and Neel Joshi. Is a picture worth a thousand words? delving into spatial reasoning for vision language models. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 37: 0 75392--75421, 2025

    2025

  82. [90]

    Multilingual e5 text embeddings: A technical report

    Liang Wang, Nan Yang, Xiaolong Huang, Linjun Yang, Rangan Majumder, and Furu Wei. Multilingual e5 text embeddings: A technical report. arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.05672, 2024 a

    2024 arXiv

  83. [91]

    Qwen2-vl: Enhancing vision-language model's perception of the world at any resolution

    Peng Wang, Shuai Bai, Sinan Tan, Shijie Wang, Zhihao Fan, Jinze Bai, Keqin Chen, Xuejing Liu, Jialin Wang, Wenbin Ge, et al. Qwen2-vl: Enhancing vision-language model's perception of the world at any resolution. arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.12191, 2024 b

    2024 arXiv

  84. [92]

    Smiles, a chemical language and information system

    David Weininger. Smiles, a chemical language and information system. 1. introduction to methodology and encoding rules. Journal of Chemical Information and Computer Sciences, 28 0 (1): 0 31--36, 1988

    1988

  85. [93]

    Tunesformer: Forming irish tunes with control codes by bar patching

    Shangda Wu, Xiaobing Li, Feng Yu, and Maosong Sun. Tunesformer: Forming irish tunes with control codes by bar patching. In Lorenzo Porcaro, Roser Batlle - Roca, and Emilia G \' o mez (eds.), Proceedings of the 2nd Workshop on Human-Centric Music Information Retrieval 2023 co-l...

    2023

  86. [94]

    Scimmir: Benchmarking scientific multi-modal information retrieval

    Siwei Wu, Yizhi Li, Kang Zhu, Ge Zhang, Yiming Liang, Kaijing Ma, Chenghao Xiao, Haoran Zhang, Bohao Yang, Wenhu Chen, et al. Scimmir: Benchmarking scientific multi-modal information retrieval. arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.13478, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  87. [95]

    Jin Xu, Zhifang Guo, Jinzheng He, Hangrui Hu, Ting He, Shuai Bai, Keqin Chen, Jialin Wang, Yang Fan, Kai Dang, et al. Qwen2. 5-omni technical report. arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.20215, 2025

    2025 arXiv

  88. [96]

    Lvlm-ehub: A comprehensive evaluation benchmark for large vision-language models

    Peng Xu, Wenqi Shao, Kaipeng Zhang, Peng Gao, Shuo Liu, Meng Lei, Fanqing Meng, Siyuan Huang, Yu Qiao, and Ping Luo. Lvlm-ehub: A comprehensive evaluation benchmark for large vision-language models. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 2024

    2024

  89. [97]

    Qwen2 technical report

    An Yang, Baosong Yang, Binyuan Hui, Bo Zheng, Bowen Yu, Chang Zhou, Chengpeng Li, Chengyuan Li, Dayiheng Liu, et al. Qwen2 technical report. arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.10671, 2024 a

    2024 arXiv

  90. [98]

    An Yang, Baosong Yang, Beichen Zhang, Binyuan Hui, Bo Zheng, Bowen Yu, Chengyuan Li, Dayiheng Liu, Fei Huang, Haoran Wei, et al. Qwen2. 5 technical report. arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.15115, 2024 b

    2024 arXiv

  91. [99]

    Blair Yang, Fuyang Cui, Keiran Paster, Jimmy Ba, Pashootan Vaezipoor, Silviu Pitis, and Michael R. Zhang. Report cards: Qualitative evaluation of language models using natural language summaries, 2024 c . URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2409.00844

    2024 arXiv

  92. [100]

    mplug-owl2: Revolutionizing multi-modal large language model with modality collaboration

    Qinghao Ye, Haiyang Xu, Jiabo Ye, Ming Yan, Anwen Hu, Haowei Liu, Qi Qian, Ji Zhang, and Fei Huang. mplug-owl2: Revolutionizing multi-modal large language model with modality collaboration. In Proceedings of the ieee/cvf conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, p...

    2024

  93. [101]

    Lamm: Language-assisted multi-modal instruction-tuning dataset, framework, and benchmark

    Zhenfei Yin, Jiong Wang, Jianjian Cao, Zhelun Shi, Dingning Liu, Mukai Li, Xiaoshui Huang, Zhiyong Wang, Lu Sheng, Lei Bai, et al. Lamm: Language-assisted multi-modal instruction-tuning dataset, framework, and benchmark. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 36: 0...

    2023

  94. [102]

    Mmt-bench: A comprehensive multimodal benchmark for evaluating large vision-language models towards multitask agi

    Kaining Ying, Fanqing Meng, Jin Wang, Zhiqian Li, Han Lin, Yue Yang, Hao Zhang, Wenbo Zhang, Yuqi Lin, Shuo Liu, et al. Mmt-bench: A comprehensive multimodal benchmark for evaluating large vision-language models towards multitask agi. arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.16006, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  95. [103]

    Mm-vet: Evaluating large multimodal models for integrated capabilities

    Weihao Yu, Zhengyuan Yang, Linjie Li, Jianfeng Wang, Kevin Lin, Zicheng Liu, Xinchao Wang, and Lijuan Wang. Mm-vet: Evaluating large multimodal models for integrated capabilities. arXiv preprint arXiv:2308.02490, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  96. [104]

    Mmmu: A massive multi-discipline multimodal understanding and reasoning benchmark for expert agi

    Xiang Yue, Yuansheng Ni, Kai Zhang, Tianyu Zheng, Ruoqi Liu, Ge Zhang, Samuel Stevens, Dongfu Jiang, Weiming Ren, Yuxuan Sun, Cong Wei, Botao Yu, Ruibin Yuan, Renliang Sun, Ming Yin, Boyuan Zheng, Zhenzhu Yang, Yibo Liu, Wenhao Huang, Huan Sun, Yu Su, and Wenhu Chen. Mmmu: A m...

    2024

  97. [105]

    Mmmu-pro: A more robust multi-discipline multimodal understanding benchmark

    Xiang Yue, Tianyu Zheng, Yuansheng Ni, Yubo Wang, Kai Zhang, Shengbang Tong, Yuxuan Sun, Botao Yu, Ge Zhang, Huan Sun, et al. Mmmu-pro: A more robust multi-discipline multimodal understanding benchmark. arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.02813, 2024 b

    2024 arXiv

  98. [106]

    All in one: Exploring unified vision-language tracking with multi-modal alignment

    Chunhui Zhang, Xin Sun, Yiqian Yang, Li Liu, Qiong Liu, Xi Zhou, and Yanfeng Wang. All in one: Exploring unified vision-language tracking with multi-modal alignment. In Proceedings of the 31st ACM International Conference on Multimedia, pp.\ 5552--5561, 2023 a

    2023

  99. [107]

    Vinvl: Revisiting visual representations in vision-language models

    Pengchuan Zhang, Xiujun Li, Xiaowei Hu, Jianwei Yang, Lei Zhang, Lijuan Wang, Yejin Choi, and Jianfeng Gao. Vinvl: Revisiting visual representations in vision-language models. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pp.\ 5579--5588, 2021

    2021

  100. [108]

    Llama-adapter: Efficient fine-tuning of language models with zero-init attention

    Renrui Zhang, Jiaming Han, Chris Liu, Peng Gao, Aojun Zhou, Xiangfei Hu, Shilin Yan, Pan Lu, Hongsheng Li, and Yu Qiao. Llama-adapter: Efficient fine-tuning of language models with zero-init attention. arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.16199, 2023 b

    2023 arXiv

  101. [109]

    Mathverse: Does your multi-modal llm truly see the diagrams in visual math problems? In European Conference on Computer Vision, pp.\ 169--186

    Renrui Zhang, Dongzhi Jiang, Yichi Zhang, Haokun Lin, Ziyu Guo, Pengshuo Qiu, Aojun Zhou, Pan Lu, Kai-Wei Chang, Yu Qiao, et al. Mathverse: Does your multi-modal llm truly see the diagrams in visual math problems? In European Conference on Computer Vision, pp.\ 169--186. Sprin...

    2024

  102. [110]

    Lost in translation: When gpt-4v (ision) can't see eye to eye with text

    Xiang Zhang, Senyu Li, Zijun Wu, and Ning Shi. Lost in translation: When gpt-4v (ision) can't see eye to eye with text. a vision-language-consistency analysis of vllms and beyond. arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.12520, 2023 c

    2023 arXiv

  103. [111]

    Cross-modal consistency in multimodal large language models

    Xiang Zhang, Senyu Li, Ning Shi, Bradley Hauer, Zijun Wu, Grzegorz Kondrak, Muhammad Abdul-Mageed, and Laks VS Lakshmanan. Cross-modal consistency in multimodal large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.09273, 2024 b

    2024 arXiv

  104. [112]

    Pmc-vqa: Visual instruction tuning for medical visual question answering

    Xiaoman Zhang, Chaoyi Wu, Ziheng Zhao, Weixiong Lin, Ya Zhang, Yanfeng Wang, and Weidi Xie. Pmc-vqa: Visual instruction tuning for medical visual question answering. arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.10415, 2023 d

    2023 arXiv

  105. [113]

    Unified vision-language pre-training for image captioning and vqa

    Luowei Zhou, Hamid Palangi, Lei Zhang, Houdong Hu, Jason Corso, and Jianfeng Gao. Unified vision-language pre-training for image captioning and vqa. In Proceedings of the AAAI conference on artificial intelligence, volume 34, pp.\ 13041--13049, 2020

    2020

  106. [114]

    Minigpt-4: Enhancing vision-language understanding with advanced large language models

    Deyao Zhu, Jun Chen, Xiaoqian Shen, Xiang Li, and Mohamed Elhoseiny. Minigpt-4: Enhancing vision-language understanding with advanced large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.10592, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  107. [115]

    Internvl3: Exploring advanced training and test-time recipes for open-source multimodal models

    Jinguo Zhu, Weiyun Wang, Zhe Chen, Zhaoyang Liu, Shenglong Ye, Lixin Gu, Hao Tian, Yuchen Duan, Weijie Su, Jie Shao, et al. Internvl3: Exploring advanced training and test-time recipes for open-source multimodal models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2504.10479, 2025

    2025 arXiv

  108. [116]

    Chemqa: a multimodal question-and-answering dataset on chemistry reasoning

    Shang Zhu, Xuefeng Liu, and Ghazal Khalighinejad. Chemqa: a multimodal question-and-answering dataset on chemistry reasoning. https://huggingface.co/datasets/shangzhu/ChemQA, 2024

    2024

  109. [117]

    Reflections from the 2024 large language model (llm) hackathon for applications in materials science and chemistry, 2024

    Yoel Zimmermann, Adib Bazgir, Zartashia Afzal, Fariha Agbere, Qianxiang Ai, Nawaf Alampara, Alexander Al-Feghali, Mehrad Ansari, Dmytro Antypov, and Others. Reflections from the 2024 large language model (llm) hackathon for applications in materials science and chemistry, 2024...

    2024 arXiv

  110. [118]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION n.dashify 't := "" t empty not t #1 #1 substring "-" = t #1 #2 substring "--" = not "--" * t #2 global.max substring 't := t #1 #1 substring "-" = "-" * t #2 global.max substring 't := while if t #1 #1 substring * t #2 gl...

  111. [119]

    @esa (Ref

    \@ifxundefined[1] #1\@undefined \@firstoftwo \@secondoftwo \@ifnum[1] #1 \@firstoftwo \@secondoftwo \@ifx[1] #1 \@firstoftwo \@secondoftwo [2] @ #1 \@temptokena #2 #1 @ \@temptokena \@ifclassloaded agu2001 natbib The agu2001 class already includes natbib coding, so you should ...

  112. [120]

    \@lbibitem[] @bibitem@first@sw\@secondoftwo \@lbibitem[#1]#2 \@extra@b@citeb \@ifundefined br@#2\@extra@b@citeb \@namedef br@#2 \@nameuse br@#2\@extra@b@citeb \@ifundefined b@#2\@extra@b@citeb @num @parse #2 @tmp #1 NAT@b@open@#2 NAT@b@shut@#2 \@ifnum @merge>\@ne @bibitem@firs...

  113. [121]

    @open @close @open @close and [1] URL: #1 \@ifundefined chapter * \@mkboth \@ifxundefined @sectionbib * \@mkboth * \@mkboth\@gobbletwo \@ifclassloaded amsart * \@ifclassloaded amsbook * \@ifxundefined @heading @heading NAT@ctr thebibliography [1] @ \@biblabel @NAT@ctr \@bibset...

Pith tools

Reviewed August 5, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.