REVIEW 4 cited by
Lost in Time: Clock and Calendar Understanding Challenges in Multimodal LLMs
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
Lost in Time: Clock and Calendar Understanding Challenges in Multimodal LLMs
read the original abstract
Understanding time from visual representations is a fundamental cognitive skill, yet it remains a challenge for multimodal large language models (MLLMs). In this work, we investigate the capabilities of MLLMs in interpreting time and date through analogue clocks and yearly calendars. To facilitate this, we curated a structured dataset comprising two subsets: 1) $\textit{ClockQA}$, which comprises various types of clock styles$-$standard, black-dial, no-second-hand, Roman numeral, and arrow-hand clocks$-$paired with time related questions; and 2) $\textit{CalendarQA}$, which consists of yearly calendar images with questions ranging from commonly known dates (e.g., Christmas, New Year's Day) to computationally derived ones (e.g., the 100th or 153rd day of the year). We aim to analyse how MLLMs can perform visual recognition, numerical reasoning, and temporal inference when presented with time-related visual data. Our evaluations show that despite recent advancements, reliably understanding time remains a significant challenge for MLLMs.
Forward citations
Cited by 4 Pith papers
-
The Cartesian Shortcut: Re-evaluate Vision Reasoning in Polar Coordinate Space
MLLMs scoring 70-83% on Cartesian visual tasks drop to 31-39% on logically equivalent polar versions, exposing reliance on grid discretization shortcuts instead of topology-invariant reasoning.
-
The Cartesian Shortcut: Re-evaluate Vision Reasoning in Polar Coordinate Space
Reformulating 53 visual reasoning tasks in polar coordinates causes frontier MLLMs to drop from 70-83% to 31-39% accuracy while preserving logical equivalence, revealing a Cartesian shortcut in current benchmarks.
-
State Beyond Appearance: Diagnosing and Improving State Consistency in Dial-Based Measurement Reading
MLLMs ignore dial state geometry and cluster by appearance, causing inconsistency under variations; TriSCA's state-distance alignment, metadata supervision, and objective alignment improve robustness on clock and gaug...
-
Blind-Spots-Bench: Evaluating Blind Spots in Multimodal Models
A 235-item multimodal stress-test shows frontier closed models outpace open-weight peers by ~10% and leaves shared failures on counting, spatial, and character-level tasks.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.