# The Gordian Knot for VLMs: Diagrammatic Knot Reasoning as a Hard Benchmark

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2605.09900 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.09900/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Multimodal reasoning, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning.
- Builds on 10 of its 34 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 11 May 2026.

## 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, 10 of 10)

- [World Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1803.10122/) (2018)
- [Mastering Diverse Domains through World Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2301.04104/) (2023)
- [Do NOT Think That Much for 2+3=? On the Overthinking of o1-Like LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.21187/) (2024)
- [To CoT or not to CoT? Chain-of-thought helps mainly on math and symbolic reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2409.12183/) (2024)
- [LiveBench: A Challenging, Contamination-Limited LLM Benchmark](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.19314/) (2024)
- [Vision language models are blind: Failing to translate detailed visual features into words](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.06581/) (2024)
- [Mind Your Step (by Step): Chain-of-Thought can Reduce Performance on Tasks where Thinking Makes Humans Worse](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.21333/) (2024)
- [Learning to Unknot](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2010.16263/) (2020)
- [On knot detection via picture recognition](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.06284/) (2025)
- [Geometric deep learning approach to knot theory](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.16808/) (2023)

## Abstract (arXiv)

A vision-language model can look at a knot diagram and report what it sees, yet fail to act on that structure. KnotBench pairs an 858,318-image corpus from 1,951 prime-knot prototypes (crossing numbers 3 to 19) with a protocol whose answers are checked against Regina's canonical knot signature. Its 14 tasks span four families, equivalence judgment, move prediction, identification, and cross-modal grounding; an image-versus-symbol split locates failures along the perception-operation gap. We score Claude Opus 4.7 and GPT-5, each with and without thinking, under a 64K output-token budget matched on both vendors. Across 56 (task, model) cases, 15 sit at or below a random baseline and 8 of 14 tasks have a best score under 1.5x random. On diagram-to-symbol transcription, no model produces a strictly correct string, and permissive Regina decoding recovers the knot in 0 to 4 of 100 items. Thinking-mode reasoning lifts overall accuracy by 1.65 points for Claude and 9.25 points for GPT-5, narrowing the gap only modestly. Read together, the four families suggest current vision-language models hold features of a diagram but lack apparatus to simulate moves on those features.