Scientific papers require models to reason jointly over text, equations, figures, tables, code, and datasets while preserving the provenance of supporting evidence. Existing benchmarks typically evaluate these capabilities in isolation, leaving unclear whether multimodal models can support realistic scientific-reading workflows. We introduce SciDocBench, a workflow-centered benchmark for scientific document understanding. It contains 124 expert-authored and difficulty-screened questions organized into seven research-assistant capability groups and 19 subtasks across five scientific domains. Each question is instantiated under four matched conditions combining English or Chinese questions with all-images-first or interleaved document representations, yielding 496 evaluation instances for controlled analysis. The strongest evaluated system achieves only 62.6/100, with pronounced weaknesses in document perception, evidence grounding, verification, and cross-document reasoning. To translate these diagnostics into scalable training signals, we introduce SciDocIR, a typed evidence-graph representation that preserves scientific document objects, layout and cross-reference relations, and provenance. Building on SciDocIR, we construct SciDocDataset, comprising approximately 15K supervised fine-tuning samples and 8K reinforcement-learning samples across 14 verifiable subtasks. Together, SciDocBench, SciDocIR, and SciDocDataset form an evaluation-to-training framework for diagnosing and improving scientific-document assistants. The project page is available at https://github.com/InternLM/SciDocBench.
Background
Collaborative Research Centers rely on FAIR-compliant, richly structured metadata, yet manual annotation is a major bottleneck. We implemented a search-augmented large language model (LLM) workflow within a local research data management system to pre-annotate biomedical entities, using human-in-the-loop ver...
M. Watter, F. Engel, Aref Kalantari et al.· Bioinformatics Advances· 0 citations
By evaluating paper retrieval, evidence grounding, and answer accuracy separately, LitTraceQA provides a testbed for scientific QA systems that produce verifiable answers rather than unsupported summaries.
Compilable Academic Document Parsing (CADP) is proposed, a paradigm that reconstructs a full page as contextual \LaTeX{} plus executable Python, so that structure-preserving elements and executable chart representations can be reconstructed, recompiled, and directly verified against the source page.
SciFigure2Code is introduced, an AI-reconstructed benchmark that instead evaluates presentation recovery: generating editable Python programs that preserve how a scientific panel is arranged and read, and provides an auditable testbed for agents that construct editable, visually faithful scientific figure presentations...
Wen-Tao Li, Yi-Bo Wu, Yi-Zhe Chen et al.· 0 citations
This work improves evidence retrieval by combining semantic ranking and repository-specific identifier pattern matching and achieves recall close to that of proprietary models while reducing estimated inference cost by 330× to 1,300×, although with lower precision.
Pietro Marini, M. Peters, Nicole Contaxis et al.· 0 citations
This work builds four modules (for drug-discovery chemistry, materials science, machine learning, and mineral geochemistry) in the ArticleMiner framework, and evaluates them on 163 papers, including a new geochemistry benchmark with expert-curated ground truth.
Md Abrar Jahin, Craig A. Knoblock, Jay Pujara· arXiv (Cornell University)· 1 citation