SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · 2602.11635

Do MLLMs Really Understand Space? A Mathematical Reasoning Evaluation

Abstract

Multimodal large language models (MLLMs) have achieved strong performance on perception-oriented tasks, yet their ability to perform mathematical spatial reasoning, defined as the capacity to parse and manipulate two- and three-dimensional relations, remains unclear. Humans easily solve textbook-style spatial reasoning problems with over 95\% accuracy, but we find that most leading MLLMs fail to reach even 60\% on the same tasks. This striking gap highlights spatial reasoning as a fundamental weakness of current models. To investigate this gap, we present \emph{MathSpatial}, the first large-scale and systematic dataset resource dedicated to mathematical spatial reasoning in MLLMs. \emph{MathSpatial} provides two complementary subsets: (i)~\emph{MathSpatial-Bench}, a rigorously curated evaluation set of 2{,}000 problems spanning 3 categories and 11 subtypes, designed to isolate spatial reasoning from perceptual noise; and (ii)~\emph{MathSpatial-Corpus}, a training set of 8{,}000 problems equipped with verified solutions and structured reasoning traces. All problems are sourced from authentic educational materials and undergo multi-stage quality control including deduplication, geometric consistency checking, and cross-validated solution verification. Benchmarking 16 leading MLLMs on \emph{MathSpatial-Bench} reveals that spatial reasoning remains a fundamental bottleneck: even GPT-5 lags behind human performance by over 35 percentage points, with particularly poor results on abstract deduction tasks. We further show that training on \emph{MathSpatial-Corpus} yields consistent improvements across model families, demonstrating the dataset's practical value for advancing spatial reasoning capabilities. \emph{MathSpatial} is publicly available at https://shuolucs.github.io/MathSpatial.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Shuo Lu, Jianjie Cheng, Yinuo Xu, Yongcan Yu, Lijun Sheng, Peijie Wang, Siru Jiang, Yongguan Hu, Run Ling, Yihua Shao, Ao Ma, Wei Feng, Lingxiao He, Meng Wang, Qianlong Xie, Xingxing Wang, Nicu Sebe, Ran He, Jian Liang. 2026-02-12. Do MLLMs Really Understand Space? A Mathematical Reasoning Evaluation. https://arxiv.org/abs/2602.11635

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Decoupling Readiness from Release for Tail-Aware Scheduling of Agentic LLM Workflows

Agentic LLM workflows consist of sequences of model turns interleaved with tool interactions, so their end-to-end completion time depends not only on inference speed but also on when ready turns are released. Most runtimes release each turn immediately upon readiness. Under contention, this eager release policy can accumulate released but unfinished work; once submitted, those turns can no longer be reordered by the workflow-level policy, increasing tail latency. We present a tail-risk-aware turn release scheduling method that jointly decides which ready turn to release next and how much released but unfinished work to maintain. The method uses a mean--Conditional Value-at-Risk (CVaR) objective to capture the evolving tail risk of unfinished workflows, incorporates online estimates of turn work when prioritizing ready turns, and adapts the released work budget to observed queue pressure. We evaluate the method using real agent execution traces from software engineering tasks across multiple LLMs and workflow arrival rates. The method performs comparably to eager release under light load and substantially reduces the P95 of workflow flow time under contention, achieving up to a \(3.50\times\) speedup.

cs.AI

Demystifying the Privacy-Utility Trade-off in LLM Interactions

The integration of Large Language Models into daily tasks relies on context-rich instructions, inevitably exposing sensitive user information. Current privacy-preserving methods typically employ context-agnostic static rules, causing severe utility degradation. However, the specific mechanisms governing how sanitization impacts downstream performance remain largely underexplored. To address this, we conduct a systematic analysis to deconstruct the privacy-utility trade-off, uncovering three underlying mechanisms: (1) Context-Dependent Utility, which first establishes when to sanitize by revealing that data value shifts from critical constraints to dispensable noise based on user intent; (2) Strategic Adaptation, which subsequently determines how to sanitize by dictating that the choice between removal and replacement depends on the task's reliance on factual integrity versus structural coherence; and (3) Combinatorial Interplay, which finally extends the protection scope by demonstrating that attributes form a semantic web of synergistic dependencies or antagonistic redundancies. Guided by these insights, we introduce an intent-driven local protection framework. By distilling a lightweight model Veilmind-4B to drive a dynamic extraction-sanitization-restoration pipeline, our approach reaches a low-leakage privacy point while preserving substantially higher response utility than existing privacy-oriented baselines, advancing the privacy-utility trade-off toward the Pareto frontier.

cs.AI

Defining AI Agents: A Compendium of Criteria, Metrics, and Benchmarks

The term agent in artificial intelligence lacks a standard definition, complicating the evaluation, comparison, and reproducibility of AI agent research. We address this ambiguity through a survey organized around five dimensions of agenticness: environmental interaction, learning and adaptation, autonomy, goal-directed behavior, and temporal coherence. For each dimension, we examine how the underlying capability has been conceptualized across prior work and synthesize the metrics, benchmarks, and evaluation frameworks used to assess it. This review provides a structured account of the current landscape of agent evaluation, highlighting both established approaches and areas where evaluation remains limited or inconsistent. We additionally introduce the Agent Compendium, a public-facing digital resource that organizes and extends the evaluation methods identified through this review. Together, the survey and compendium provide a common structure for evaluating and comparing agent capabilities across AI systems, supporting more reproducible research, clearer communication, and more systematic study of artificial agents.

cs.AI