Skip to content
Back to skills

We Math Eval

ASecurity

Evaluates the visual mathematical reasoning capabilities of Large Multimodal Models (LMMs). It probes their ability to decompose composite problems, apply hierarchical knowledge concepts, and reason through multi-step visual math tasks without relying on rote memorization. Use when the user wants to benchmark on We-Math testmini, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports accuracy.

  • 3 stars
  • 0 votes
  • 0 copies
  • 2 views
  • Added September 11, 2026
researchpythongogitperformance

Security analysis

A100/100

Scanned September 11, 2026

npx -y skills add qhjqhj00/research-skills-pool --skill we-math-eval --agent claude-code

Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.

Are you the author of We Math Eval?

Add the live security badge to your README. It updates with every re-scan.

Security grade badge for We Math Eval
[![Security: A — Skills Directory](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/api/skills/qhjqhj00-we-math-eval/badge)](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/qhjqhj00-we-math-eval)

More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page. Keep it an A: scan every change in CI with Pro.

Download with Pro
SKILL.md
---
name: we-math-eval
description: Evaluates the visual mathematical reasoning capabilities of Large Multimodal Models (LMMs). It probes their ability to decompose composite problems, apply hierarchical knowledge concepts, and reason through multi-step visual math tasks without relying on rote memorization. Use when the user wants to benchmark on We-Math testmini, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports accuracy.
metadata:
  skill_kind: dataset_eval
  source_arxiv: 2407.01284
  bibtex_key: qiao2024wemath
  confidence: high
---

# we-math-eval

> We-Math: Does Your Large Multimodal Model Achieve Human-like Mathematical Reasoning? — Qiao et al. (2024) (arXiv:2407.01284, 2024)

## What this evaluates

Evaluates the visual mathematical reasoning capabilities of Large Multimodal Models (LMMs). It probes their ability to decompose composite problems, apply hierarchical knowledge concepts, and reason through multi-step visual math tasks without relying on rote memorization.

## Datasets

- **We-Math testmini** — total 1740; splits: testmini (1740); repo https://github.com/We-Math/We-Math

## Metrics

- `accuracy` **(primary)** — range: percent
  - Percentage of correctly predicted options after regex matching against ground truth.
- `four-dimensional metric (IK, IG, CM, RM)` — range: percent
  - Classifies model reasoning into Insufficient Knowledge (IK), Inadequate Generalization (IG), Complete Mastery (CM), or Rote Memorization (RM). Reported as percentages under strict and loose evaluation settings.

## Input / output format

**Input**: Multiple-choice visual mathematical problems accompanied by an extra "uncertain" option to mitigate option-deduction.

**Output**: Predicted option letter or answer string.

## Scoring recipe

```python
# Accuracy
pred = extract_regex(model_output)
score = 1.0 if pred == ground_truth else 0.0

# Four-dimensional metric
# Classify reasoning trace into:
# IK: Insufficient Knowledge (fails to identify core concept)
# IG: Inadequate Generalization (knows concept but fails application)
# CM: Complete Mastery (correct reasoning & answer)
# RM: Rote Memorization (matches training without reasoning)
# Compute category percentages under strict/loose settings.
```

## Common pitfalls

- Models often bypass reasoning by deducing answers directly from multiple-choice options.
- Performance drops sharply as problem complexity (number of knowledge concepts/steps) increases.
- Visual measurement tasks (e.g., angles, units) are disproportionately difficult due to visual encoder limitations.

## Evidence (verbatim from paper)

> For automated evaluation, we standardize all samples into a multiple-choice format. We use regex to match the LMMs’ predictions and then calculate their accuracy against the ground-truth answers for main results. For analyses in section [3.2] and [3.3], we utilize the four-dimensional metric described in section [2.2] for assessment.

## Citation

```bibtex
@misc{qiao2024wemath,
  title={We-Math: Does Your Large Multimodal Model Achieve Human-like Mathematical Reasoning?},
  author={Qiao et al. (2024)},
  year={2024},
  note={arXiv:2407.01284}
}
```

- arXiv: 2407.01284

Attribution

Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.

Comments

Loading comments…

Newsletter

Get the weekly list of safe new skills, and the ones we pulled.