Evaluates a training-free, dynamic multi-expert aggregation framework for multimodal reasoning. It tests the system's ability to select specialized pre-trained experts and synthesize their outputs across video, audio, 3D, and medical domains without fine-tuning. Use when the user wants to benchmark on Video-MMMU, MMAU, SQA3D, M3D, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports accuracy.
Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Mexa Eval?
Add the live security badge to your README. It updates with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/qhjqhj00-mexa-eval)
---
name: mexa-eval
description: Evaluates a training-free, dynamic multi-expert aggregation framework for multimodal reasoning. It tests the system's ability to select specialized pre-trained experts and synthesize their outputs across video, audio, 3D, and medical domains without fine-tuning. Use when the user wants to benchmark on Video-MMMU, MMAU, SQA3D, M3D, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports accuracy.
metadata:
skill_kind: dataset_eval
source_arxiv: 2506.17113
bibtex_key: yu2025mexa
confidence: high
---
# mexa-eval
> MEXA: Towards General Multimodal Reasoning with Dynamic Multi-Expert Aggregation — Yu et al. (2025) (arXiv:2506.17113, 2025)
## What this evaluates
Evaluates a training-free, dynamic multi-expert aggregation framework for multimodal reasoning. It tests the system's ability to select specialized pre-trained experts and synthesize their outputs across video, audio, 3D, and medical domains without fine-tuning.
## Datasets
- **Video-MMMU** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **MMAU** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **SQA3D** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **M3D** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
## Metrics
- `accuracy` **(primary)** — range: percent
- Percentage of correctly answered multiple-choice questions out of the total number of questions in the benchmark.
## Input / output format
**Input**: Multimodal inputs (video, audio, 3D scenes, or medical scans) paired with multiple-choice questions.
**Output**: A single selected option from the provided multiple-choice answers.
## Scoring recipe
```python
def calculate_accuracy(predictions, gold_labels):
correct = sum(1 for p, g in zip(predictions, gold_labels) if p == g)
return (correct / len(gold_labels)) * 100
```
## Common pitfalls
- The framework relies on external captioners for each modality; mismatched caption quality or prompt engineering can bottleneck performance regardless of the router/aggregator strength.
- Evaluation is strictly multiple-choice; open-ended generation or free-form reasoning capabilities are not measured.
- Performance is highly sensitive to the choice of router and aggregator (e.g., GPT-4o vs Qwen2.5-VL, DeepSeek vs GPT-4o); swapping these without re-evaluation may yield significantly different results.
## Evidence (verbatim from paper)
> We evaluate MEXA on all datasets under the multiple-choice QA setting, and report performance based on standard accuracy metrics across all experiments.
## Citation
```bibtex
@misc{yu2025mexa,
title={MEXA: Towards General Multimodal Reasoning with Dynamic Multi-Expert Aggregation},
author={Yu et al. (2025)},
year={2025},
note={arXiv:2506.17113}
}
```
- arXiv: 2506.17113