Search and Filter

Repository Feedback

Your feedback helps us improve the repository's content relevance and usability. Please share your thoughts to help us better serve researchers and practitioners.

Submit feedback

Submit a research study

Contribute to the repository:

Add a paper

Visual Reasoning Benchmark: Evaluating Multimodal Llms On Classroom-Authentic Visual Problems From Primary Education

Date
Publisher
arXiv
AI models have achieved state-of-the-art results in textual reasoning; however, their ability to reason over spatial and relational structures remains a critical bottleneck -- particularly in early-grade maths, which relies heavily on visuals. This paper introduces the visual reasoning benchmark (VRB), a novel dataset designed to evaluate Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) on their ability to solve authentic visual problems from classrooms. This benchmark is built on a set of 701 questions sourced from primary school examinations in Zambia and India, which cover a range of tasks such as reasoning by analogy, pattern completion, and spatial matching. We outline the methodology and development of the benchmark which intentionally uses unedited, minimal-text images to test if models can meet realistic needs of primary education. Our findings reveal a ``jagged frontier'' of capability where models demonstrate better proficiency in static skills such as counting and scaling, but reach a distinct ``spatial ceiling'' when faced with dynamic operations like folding, reflection, and rotation. These weaknesses pose a risk for classroom use on visual reasoning problems, with the potential for incorrect marking, false scaffolding, and reinforcing student misconceptions. Consequently, education-focused benchmarks like the VRB are essential for determining the functional boundaries of multimodal tools used in classrooms.
Study at a glance
  • Question: How well can multimodal AI models solve authentic, minimal-text visual reasoning problems from primary school exams?
  • Setting and data: 701 primary school exam questions from Zambia (2018–2022) and India (2014–2024), evaluated across 45 multimodal models.
  • Method: Benchmark evaluation comparing model accuracy against human consensus answers across tasks, skills, and image quality levels.
Why it matters

Early-grade math relies heavily on visuals, but AI models often struggle to reason over spatial structures. Without strong visual reasoning, AI tools in classrooms risk providing incorrect grading and reinforcing student misconceptions.

Key findings
  • Evaluated models achieved accuracies ranging from 23% to 78%, with Gemini-3.0 Flash scoring highest (78%) and many models performing near the 25% chance level.
  • Models succeeded more on static skills like scaling (+5 percentage points) and counting (+1.4 points), but faced a spatial ceiling on folding (-9 points), reflection, and rotation.
  • Model accuracy dropped from 38% on pristine images to roughly 30% on questions with moderate visual errors or photocopying noise, with frontier models declining most sharply.

Summary drafted with AI from the full paper and may contain errors. See the full paper for details.

Why use AI?