ArticleNature computational science2025
Probing the limitations of multimodal language models for chemistry and materials research.
Article in Nature computational science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 8 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- AI-Driven Synthesis in Medicinal Chemistry: Integrating Large Language Models, Robotic Automation, and Sustainability Metrics to Accelerate Drug Discovery.Medicinal research reviews · 2026Review
- Leveraging Large Language Models for Understanding Fundamental Principles of Catalysis.The journal of physical chemistry. C, Nanomaterials and interfaces · 2026Review
- A Systematic Survey and Benchmark of Deep Learning for Molecular Property Prediction in the Foundation Model Era.Journal of chemical theory and computation · 2026Review
- Looking back and to the future after four-plus years of language in chemistry.Digital discovery · 2026Review
- General-Purpose Models for the Chemical Sciences: LLMs and Beyond.Chemical reviews · 2026Review
- Evaluating large language models on multimodal chemistry olympiad exams.Communications chemistry · 2025Article
- Evaluating large language model agents for automation of atomic force microscopy.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Cross-disciplinary perspectives on the potential for artificial intelligence across chemistry.Chemical Society reviews · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Recent advancements in artificial intelligence have sparked interest in scientific assistants that could support researchers across the full spectrum of scientific workflows, from literature review to experimental design and data analysis. A key capability for such systems is the ability to process and reason about scientific information in both visual and textual forms-from interpreting spectroscopic data to understanding laboratory set-ups. Here we introduce MaCBench, a comprehensive benchmark for evaluating how vision language models handle real-world chemistry and materials science tasks across three core aspects: data extraction, experimental execution and results interpretation. Through a systematic evaluation of leading models, we find that although these systems show promising capabilities in basic perception tasks-achieving near-perfect performance in equipment identification and standardized data extraction-they exhibit fundamental limitations in spatial reasoning, cross-modal information synthesis and multi-step logical inference. Our insights have implications beyond chemistry and materials science, suggesting that developing reliable multimodal AI scientific assistants may require advances in curating suitable training data and approaches to training those models.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.