Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40166749›Full record

ArticleArXiv2025

MicroVQA: A Multimodal Reasoning Benchmark for Microscopy-Based Scientific Research.

James Burgess, Jeffrey J Nirschl, Laura Bravo-Sánchez, Alejandro Lozano, Sanket Rajan Gupte, Jesus G Galaz-Montoya, Yuhui Zhang, Yuchang Su, Disha Bhowmik, Zachary Coman and 13 more

Abstract readPreprint
In one paragraph

Article in ArXiv, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

23 authors.

James BurgessStanford University.
Jeffrey J NirschlStanford University.
Laura Bravo-SánchezStanford University.
Alejandro LozanoStanford University.
Sanket Rajan GupteStanford University.
Jesus G Galaz-MontoyaStanford University.
Yuhui ZhangStanford University.
Yuchang SuTsinghua University.
Disha BhowmikUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
Zachary ComanUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
Sarina M HasanPrinceton University.
Alexandra JohannessonKTH Royal Institute of Technology.
William D LeineweberStanford University.
Malvika G NairUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
Ridhi YarlagaddaUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
Connor ZuraskiStanford University.
Wah ChiuStanford University.
Sarah CohenUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
Jan N HansenStanford University.
Manuel D LeonettiChan Zuckerberg Biohub Network.
Chad LiuChan Zuckerberg Biohub Network.
Emma LundbergStanford University.
Serena Yeung-LevyStanford University.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Scientific research demands sophisticated reasoning over multimodal data, a challenge especially prevalent in biology. Despite recent advances in multimodal large language models (MLLMs) for AI-assisted research, existing multimodal reasoning benchmarks only target up to college-level difficulty, while research-level benchmarks emphasize lower-level perception, falling short of the complex multimodal reasoning needed for scientific discovery. To bridge this gap, we introduce MicroVQA, a visual-question answering (VQA) benchmark designed to assess three reasoning capabilities vital in research workflows: expert image understanding, hypothesis generation, and experiment proposal. MicroVQA consists of 1,042 multiple-choice questions (MCQs) curated by biology experts across diverse microscopy modalities, ensuring VQA samples represent real scientific practice. In constructing the benchmark, we find that standard MCQ generation methods induce language shortcuts, motivating a new two-stage pipeline: an optimized LLM prompt structures question-answer pairs into MCQs; then, an agent-based 'RefineBot' updates them to remove shortcuts. Benchmarking on state-of-the-art MLLMs reveal a peak performance of 53%; models with smaller LLMs only slightly underperform top models, suggesting that language-based reasoning is less challenging than multimodal reasoning; and tuning with scientific articles enhances performance. Expert analysis of chain-of-thought responses shows that perception errors are the most frequent, followed by knowledge errors and then overgeneralization errors. These insights highlight the challenges in multimodal scientific reasoning, showing MicroVQA is a valuable resource advancing AI-driven biomedical research. MicroVQA is available here, project here.

Identifiers

PMID40166749
PMCPMC11957224

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.