Multimodal large language models and physics visual tasks: comparative analysis of performance and costs
Giulia Polverini, Bor Gregorcic

TL;DR
This study benchmarks 15 multimodal large language models on physics visual tasks, revealing significant variability in performance and costs, and providing insights for educational stakeholders to make informed model choices.
Contribution
It offers a comparative analysis of multiple MLLMs on physics conceptual assessments, highlighting performance variability and cost considerations for educational applications.
Findings
Performance ranges from 21% to 81.5%.
Cheaper models can be sufficient for certain tasks.
Expensive models do not always outperform cheaper ones.
Abstract
Multimodal large language models (MLLMs) capable of processing both text and visual inputs are increasingly being explored for uses in physics education, such as tutoring, formative assessment, and grading. This study evaluates a range of publicly available MLLMs on a set of standardized, image-based physics research-based conceptual assessments (concept inventories). We benchmark 15 models from three major providers (Anthropic, Google, and OpenAI) across 102 physics items, focusing on two main questions: (1) How well do these models perform on conceptual physics tasks involving visual representations? and (2) What are the financial costs associated with their use? The results show high variability in both performance and cost. The performance of the tested models ranges from 81.5% to as low as 21%. We also found that expensive models do not always outperform cheaper ones and that,…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
