arXiv subjects

Junrong Chen

Publications and source records attributed to Junrong Chen.

4 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

World Reasoning Arena

World models (WMs) are intended to serve as internal simulators of the real world that enable agents to understand, anticipate, and act upon complex environments. Existing WM benchmarks remain narrowly focused on next-state prediction and visual fidelity, overlooking the richer simulation capabilities required for intelligent behavior. To address this gap, we introduce WR-Arena, a comprehensive benchmark for evaluating WMs along three fundamental dimensions of next world simulation: (i) Action Simulation Fidelity, the ability to interpret and follow semantically meaningful, multi-step instructions and generate diverse counterfactual rollouts; (ii) Long-horizon Forecast, the ability to sustain accurate, coherent, and physically plausible simulations across extended interactions; and (iii) Simulative Reasoning and Planning, the ability to support goal-directed reasoning by simulating, comparing, and selecting among alternative futures in both structured and open-ended environments. We build a task taxonomy and curate diverse datasets designed to probe these capabilities, moving beyond single-turn and perceptual evaluations. Through extensive experiments with state-of-the-art WMs, our results expose a substantial gap between current models and human-level hypothetical reasoning, and establish WR-Arena as both a diagnostic tool and a guideline for advancing next-generation world models capable of robust understanding, forecasting, and purposeful action. The code is available at https://github.com/MBZUAI-IFM/WR-Arena.

cs.CV↗

arXiv2026

Fin-RATE: A Real-world Financial Analytics and Tracking Evaluation Benchmark for LLMs on SEC Filings

With the increasing deployment of Large Language Models (LLMs) in the finance domain, LLMs are increasingly expected to parse complex regulatory disclosures. However, existing benchmarks often focus on isolated details, failing to reflect the complexity of professional analysis that requires synthesizing information across multiple documents, reporting periods, and corporate entities. Furthermore, these benchmarks do not disentangle whether errors arise from retrieval failures, generation inaccuracies, domain-specific reasoning mistakes, or misinterpretation of the query or context, making it difficult to precisely diagnose performance bottlenecks. To bridge these gaps, we introduce Fin-RATE, a benchmark built on U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) filings and mirroring financial analyst workflows through three pathways: detail-oriented reasoning within individual disclosures, cross-entity comparison under shared topics, and longitudinal tracking of the same firm across reporting periods. We benchmark 17 leading LLMs, spanning open-source, closed-source, and finance-specialized models, under both ground-truth context and retrieval-augmented settings. Results show substantial performance degradation, with accuracy dropping by 18.60% and 14.35% as tasks shift from single-document reasoning to longitudinal and cross-entity analysis. This degradation is associated with increased comparison hallucinations, temporal and entity mismatches, and is further reflected in declines in reasoning quality and factual consistency--limitations that existing benchmarks have yet to formally categorize or quantify.

cs.CE↗

arXiv2025

Do Vision-Language Models Have Internal World Models? Towards an Atomic Evaluation

Internal world models (WMs) enable agents to understand the world's state and predict transitions, serving as the basis for advanced deliberative reasoning. Recent large Vision-Language Models (VLMs), such as OpenAI o3, GPT-4o and Gemini, exhibit potential as general-purpose WMs. While the latest studies have evaluated and shown limitations in specific capabilities such as visual understanding, a systematic evaluation of VLMs' fundamental WM abilities remains absent. Drawing on comparative psychology and cognitive science, we propose a two-stage framework that assesses Perception (visual, spatial, temporal, quantitative, and motion) and Prediction (mechanistic simulation, transitive inference, compositional inference) to provide an atomic evaluation of VLMs as WMs. Guided by this framework, we introduce WM-ABench, a large-scale benchmark comprising 23 fine-grained evaluation dimensions across 6 diverse simulated environments with controlled counterfactual simulations. Through 660 experiments on 15 latest commercial and open-source VLMs, we find that these models exhibit striking limitations in basic world modeling abilities. For instance, almost all models perform at near-random accuracy when distinguishing motion trajectories. Additionally, they lack disentangled understanding -- e.g., some models tend to believe blue objects move faster than green ones. More rich results and analyses reveal significant gaps between VLMs and human-level world modeling.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2025

Evaluating Clinical Competencies of Large Language Models with a General Practice Benchmark

Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated considerable potential in general practice. However, existing benchmarks and evaluation frameworks primarily depend on exam-style or simplified question-answer formats, lacking a competency-based structure aligned with the real-world clinical responsibilities encountered in general practice. Consequently, the extent to which LLMs can reliably fulfill the duties of general practitioners (GPs) remains uncertain. In this work, we propose a novel evaluation framework to assess the capability of LLMs to function as GPs. Based on this framework, we introduce a general practice benchmark (GPBench), whose data are meticulously annotated by domain experts in accordance with routine clinical practice standards. We evaluate ten state-of-the-art LLMs and analyze their competencies. Our findings indicate that current LLMs are not suitable for autonomous deployment in clinical general practice and that all realistic applications require continuous human oversight; further optimization specifically tailored to the daily responsibilities of GPs remains essential.

cs.CL↗