pith. sign in

arxiv: 2501.07244 · v2 · pith:WHDNYATKnew · submitted 2025-01-13 · 💻 cs.CV · cs.CL

Can Vision-Language Models Evaluate Handwritten Math?

classification 💻 cs.CV cs.CL
keywords handwrittenvlmsfermatcontenterrormodelsabilitybenchmark
0
0 comments X
read the original abstract

Recent advancements in Vision-Language Models (VLMs) have opened new possibilities in automatic grading of handwritten student responses, particularly in mathematics. However, a comprehensive study to test the ability of VLMs to evaluate and reason over handwritten content remains absent. To address this gap, we introduce FERMAT, a benchmark designed to assess the ability of VLMs to detect, localize and correct errors in handwritten mathematical content. FERMAT spans four key error dimensions - computational, conceptual, notational, and presentation - and comprises over 2,200 handwritten math solutions derived from 609 manually curated problems from grades 7-12 with intentionally introduced perturbations. Using FERMAT we benchmark nine VLMs across three tasks: error detection, localization, and correction. Our results reveal significant shortcomings in current VLMs in reasoning over handwritten text, with Gemini-1.5-Pro achieving the highest error correction rate (77%). We also observed that some models struggle with processing handwritten content, as their accuracy improves when handwritten inputs are replaced with printed text or images. These findings highlight the limitations of current VLMs and reveal new avenues for improvement. We release FERMAT and all the associated resources in the open-source to drive further research.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Exploring Vision-Language Models for Online Signature Verification: A Zero-Shot Capability Study

    cs.CV 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    Zero-shot VLMs like GPT-5.2 achieve very low error rates on random forgeries in signature verification but perform poorly on skilled forgeries and are harmed by chain-of-thought reasoning.