# MiCEval: Unveiling Multimodal Chain of Thought's Quality via Image Description and Reasoning Steps

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2410.14668 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.14668/

## Key facts

- Cited by 8 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Multimodal reasoning, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning.
- Builds on 12 of its 63 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 18 Oct 2024.

## Placed in

- LLM reasoning / [Multimodal reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/lr/multimodal-reasoning/)
- Multimodal LLMs / vision-language models / [VLM benchmarks and visual reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/mllm/vlm-benchmarks-and-visual-reasoning/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 12 of 12)

- [GPT-4 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.08774/) (2023)
- [The Llama 3 Herd of Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.21783/) (2024)
- [Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arena](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.05685/) (2023)
- [Gemini 1.5: Unlocking multimodal understanding across millions of tokens of context](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.05530/) (2024)
- [InstructBLIP: Towards General-purpose Vision-Language Models with Instruction Tuning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.06500/) (2023)
- [Qwen-VL: A Versatile Vision-Language Model for Understanding, Localization, Text Reading, and Beyond](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.12966/) (2023)
- [MiniCPM-V: A GPT-4V Level MLLM on Your Phone](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2408.01800/) (2024)
- [Are We on the Right Way for Evaluating Large Vision-Language Models?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.20330/) (2024)
- [Multimodal Chain-of-Thought Reasoning in Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.00923/) (2023)
- [Eyes Wide Shut? Exploring the Visual Shortcomings of Multimodal LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.06209/) (2024)
- [Visual CoT: Advancing Multi-Modal Language Models with a Comprehensive Dataset and Benchmark for Chain-of-Thought Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.16999/) (2024)
- [Evaluating Mathematical Reasoning Beyond Accuracy](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.05692/) (2024)

## Built on by (most cited first, 8 of 8)

- [Multimodal Chain-of-Thought Reasoning: A Comprehensive Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.12605/) (2025)
- [Evaluating MLLMs with Multimodal Multi-image Reasoning Benchmark](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.04280/) (2025)
- [THINK-Bench: Evaluating Thinking Efficiency and Chain-of-Thought Quality of Large Reasoning Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.22113/) (2025)
- [LaRe: Latent Refocusing for Multimodal Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2511.02360/) (2025)
- [DIVA-GRPO: Enhancing Multimodal Reasoning through Difficulty-Adaptive Variant Advantage](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2603.01106/) (2026)
- [From Perception to Reasoning: Deep Thinking Empowers Multimodal Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2511.12861/) (2025)
- [Beyond Factual Accuracy: Evaluating Global Reasoning Integrity in RAG Systems with LogicScore](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.15050/) (2026)
- [When Seeing Is not Enough: Revealing the Limits of Active Reasoning in MLLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.15421/) (2025)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Multimodal Chain of Thought (MCoT) is a popular prompting strategy for improving the performance of multimodal large language models (MLLMs) across a range of complex reasoning tasks. Despite its popularity, there is a notable absence of automated methods for evaluating the quality of reasoning steps in MCoT. To address this gap, we propose Multimodal Chain-of-Thought Evaluation (MiCEval), a framework designed to assess the correctness of reasoning chains by evaluating the quality of both the description and each reasoning step. The evaluation of the description component focuses on the accuracy of the image descriptions, while the reasoning step evaluates the quality of each step as it is conditionally generated based on the preceding steps. MiCEval is built upon a fine-grained dataset with annotations that rate each step according to correctness, relevance, and informativeness. Extensive experiments on four state-of-the-art MLLMs show that step-wise evaluations using MiCEval align more closely with human judgments compared to existing methods based on cosine similarity or fine-tuning approaches. MiCEval datasets and code can be found in https://github.com/alenai97/MiCEval.