arXivDaily arXiv每日学术速递 周一至周五更新
arXiv周末暂无论文更新,休息一下吧,周末愉快~~
arXiv 2601.12346cs.CV

MMDeepResearch-Bench: 一个多模态深度研究代理的基准

MMDeepResearch-Bench: A Benchmark for Multimodal Deep Research Agents

OSU(俄亥俄州立大学);Amazon(亚马逊公司);UMich(密歇根大学);UCL(伦敦大学学院);CUHK(香港中文大学);UCR(加州大学尔湾分校);CWRU(克里夫兰医学中心);HKU(香港大学)
Peizhou Huang, Zixuan Zhong, Zhongwei Wan, Donghao Zhou, Samiul Alam, Xin Wang, Zexin Li, Zhihao Dou, Li Zhu, Jing Xiong, Chaofan Tao, Yan Xu, Dimitrios Dimitri… 展开作者

Peizhou Huang, Zixuan Zhong, Zhongwei Wan, Donghao Zhou, Samiul Alam, Xin Wang, Zexin Li, Zhihao Dou, Li Zhu, Jing Xiong, Chaofan Tao, Yan Xu, Dimitrios Dimitriadis, Tuo Zhang, Mi Zhang

AI总结:

MMDeepResearch-Bench提出一个多模态深度研究代理的基准,强调报告式合成与引用证据的结合,揭示多模态完整性对深度研究代理的重要性。

摘要:

深度研究代理(DRAs)通过多步骤搜索和综合生成引用丰富的报告,但现有基准主要针对纯文本设置或短形式多模态问答,缺少端到端的多模态证据使用。我们引入MMDeepResearch-Bench(MMDR-Bench),一个包含140个专家设计任务的基准,覆盖21个领域,每个任务提供图像-文本包以评估多模态理解和引用基础的报告生成。与先前设置相比,MMDR-Bench强调报告式合成,要求模型将视觉元素连接到来源声明,并在叙述、引用和视觉参考之间保持一致性。我们进一步提出一个统一且可解释的评估流程:公式-LLM自适应评估(FLAE)用于报告质量,可信检索对齐引用评估(TRACE)用于引用基础的证据对齐,以及多模态支持对齐完整性检查(MOSAIC)用于文本-视觉完整性,每个生成细粒度信号,支持错误诊断,而不仅仅是一个总体分数。在25种最先进的模型上进行实验,揭示了生成质量、引用纪律和多模态接地之间的系统性权衡,强调强文笔本身并不保证忠实的证据使用,且多模态完整性仍然是深度研究代理的关键瓶颈。

英文摘要:

Deep Research Agents (DRAs) generate citation-rich reports via multi-step search and synthesis, yet existing benchmarks mainly target text-only settings or short-form multimodal QA, missing end-to-end multimodal evidence use. We introduce MMDeepResearch-Bench (MMDR-Bench), a benchmark of 140 expert-crafted tasks across 21 domains, where each task provides an image-text bundle to evaluate multimodal understanding and citation-grounded report generation. Compared to prior setups, MMDR-Bench emphasizes report-style synthesis with explicit evidence use, where models must connect visual artifacts to sourced claims and maintain consistency across narrative, citations, and visual references. We further propose a unified, interpretable evaluation pipeline: Formula-LLM Adaptive Evaluation (FLAE) for report quality, Trustworthy Retrieval-Aligned Citation Evaluation (TRACE) for citation-grounded evidence alignment, and Multimodal Support-Aligned Integrity Check (MOSAIC) for text-visual integrity, each producing fine-grained signals that support error diagnosis beyond a single overall score. Experiments across 25 state-of-the-art models reveal systematic trade-offs between generation quality, citation discipline, and multimodal grounding, highlighting that strong prose alone does not guarantee faithful evidence use and that multimodal integrity remains a key bottleneck for deep research agents.

机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来,可能存在错误,请以论文正文为准。

↑