analiza aiqbench
MathVis introduces a rigorous benchmark assessing whether large language models can genuinely perform diagram-mediated reasoning or merely generate formal code resembling visual outputs. The study reveals that current frontier models struggle to simplify complex mathematical logic through explicit visual diagrams, often producing solutions that are formally correct but visually confusing to humans. This work highlights a critical gap in multimodal AI capabilities and sets a new standard for evaluating visual reasoning in mathematical contexts.
MathVis: Can AI Reason through Drawing? A Benchmark for Mathematical Figure Generation
arXiv:2610.12954v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: This paper introduces MathVis, a benchmark designed to evaluate LLMs' ability to visualize frontier mathematical problems and perform diagram-assisted reasoning. The benchmark consists of 512 tasks, each comprising a mathematical statement, a reference diagram, executable TikZ or SVG code, a Gold Intermediate Representation (IR), atomic rubrics, and error codes. Through rigorous evaluation, GPT-6-Astra, Claude Fable 5, and Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview achieve pass@1 scores of 31.25%, 26.56%, and 22.85%, respectively. We found that although the tasks require visualization, LLMs produce outputs dominated by formal languages, symbols, and graphics programs, rather than explicit diagram-mediated reasoning. Furthermore, while the solutions generated by LLMs may contain all the necessary elements, they are often visually confusing to humans. Ultimately, this benchmark aims to visualize mathematical problems and promote research on enabling LLMs to simplify their reasoning via visual diagrams.
Title:MathVis: Can AI Reason through Drawing? A Benchmark for Mathematical Figure Generation
Abstract:This paper introduces MathVis, a benchmark designed to evaluate LLMs' ability to visualize frontier mathematical problems and perform diagram-assisted reasoning. The benchmark consists of 512 tasks, each comprising a mathematical statement, a reference diagram, executable TikZ or SVG code, a Gold Intermediate Representation (IR), atomic rubrics, and error codes. Through rigorous evaluation, GPT-6-Astra, Claude Fable 5, and Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview achieve pass@1 scores of 31.25%, 26.56%, and 22.85%, respectively. We found that although the tasks require visualization, LLMs produce outputs dominated by formal languages, symbols, and graphics programs, rather than explicit diagram-mediated reasoning. Furthermore, while the solutions generated by LLMs may contain all the necessary elements, they are often visually confusing to humans. Ultimately, this benchmark aims to visualize mathematical problems and promote research on enabling LLMs to simplify their reasoning via visual diagrams.
Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)
arXiv:2610.12954 [cs.AI]
(or arXiv:2610.12954v1 [cs.AI] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.12954 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Text integral sub licența deschisă a publicației · 241 cuvinte
Subiecte conexe

Lattice-Based Cryptography Explained
Quantum Zeitgeist · 15 aug. 2026
Links #3: 2026/06 Part 1
LessWrong · 15 iun. 2026

Game Design Creativity evals
LessWrong · 12 oct. 2026
Artificial Intelligence for Mathematical Reasoning: An Integrated Survey of Language Models, Neuro-symbolic Systems, and Verified Discovery
arXiv · 9 iun. 2026