Skip to content
← Back to explorer

BRIDGE: Benchmark for multi-hop Reasoning In long multimodal Documents with Grounded Evidence

Biao Xiang, Soyeon Caren Han, Yihao Ding · Mar 9, 2026 · Citations: 0

Automatic Metrics
Open arXiv Find Implementation RSS feed Shortlist (0)

Data freshness

Extraction: Fresh

Check recency before relying on this page for active eval decisions. Use stale pages as context and verify against current hub results.

Metadata refreshed

Mar 9, 2026, 3:54 AM

Recent

Extraction refreshed

Mar 13, 2026, 5:21 AM

Fresh

Extraction source

Persisted extraction

Confidence 0.35

Abstract

Multi-hop question answering (QA) is widely used to evaluate the reasoning capabilities of large language models, yet most benchmarks focus on final answer correctness and overlook intermediate reasoning, especially in long multimodal documents. We introduce BRIDGE, a benchmark for multi-hop reasoning over long scientific papers that require integrating evidence across text, tables, and figures. The dataset supports both chain-like and fan-out structures and provides explicit multi-hop reasoning annotations for step-level evaluation beyond answer accuracy. Experiments with state-of-the-art LLMs and multimodal retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) systems reveal systematic deficiencies in evidence aggregation and grounding that remain hidden under conventional answer-only evaluation. BRIDGE provides a targeted testbed for diagnosing reasoning failures in long multimodal documents.

Low-signal caution for protocol decisions

Use this page for context, then validate protocol choices against stronger HFEPX references before implementation decisions.

  • Extraction flags indicate low-signal or possible false-positive protocol mapping.
  • Extraction confidence is 0.35 (below strong-reference threshold).
Human Eval Hub LLM-as-Judge Hub Pairwise Preference Hub

HFEPX Relevance Assessment

This paper is adjacent to HFEPX scope and is best used for background context, not as a primary protocol reference.

Best use

Background context only

Use if you need

A secondary eval reference to pair with stronger protocol papers.

Main weakness

Extraction flags indicate low-signal or possible false-positive protocol mapping.

Trust level

Low

Eval-Fit Score

0/100 • Low

Treat as adjacent context, not a core eval-method reference.

Human Feedback Signal

Not explicit in abstract metadata

Evaluation Signal

Detected

HFEPX Fit

Adjacent candidate

Extraction confidence: Low

If you are doing eval pipeline work, start here:

Human Eval Hub LLM-as-Judge Hub Pairwise Preference Hub Tool-Use Eval Hub

Field Provenance & Confidence

Each key protocol field shows extraction state, confidence band, and data source so you can decide whether to trust it directly or validate from full text.

Human Feedback Types

missing

None explicit

Confidence: Low Source: Persisted extraction missing

No explicit feedback protocol extracted.

Evidence snippet: Multi-hop question answering (QA) is widely used to evaluate the reasoning capabilities of large language models, yet most benchmarks focus on final answer correctness and overlook intermediate reasoning, especially in long multimodal documents.

Evaluation Modes

partial

Automatic Metrics

Confidence: Low Source: Persisted extraction evidenced

Includes extracted eval setup.

Evidence snippet: Multi-hop question answering (QA) is widely used to evaluate the reasoning capabilities of large language models, yet most benchmarks focus on final answer correctness and overlook intermediate reasoning, especially in long multimodal documents.

Quality Controls

missing

Not reported

Confidence: Low Source: Persisted extraction missing

No explicit QC controls found.

Evidence snippet: Multi-hop question answering (QA) is widely used to evaluate the reasoning capabilities of large language models, yet most benchmarks focus on final answer correctness and overlook intermediate reasoning, especially in long multimodal documents.

Benchmarks / Datasets

missing

Not extracted

Confidence: Low Source: Persisted extraction missing

No benchmark anchors detected.

Evidence snippet: Multi-hop question answering (QA) is widely used to evaluate the reasoning capabilities of large language models, yet most benchmarks focus on final answer correctness and overlook intermediate reasoning, especially in long multimodal documents.

Reported Metrics

partial

Accuracy

Confidence: Low Source: Persisted extraction evidenced

Useful for evaluation criteria comparison.

Evidence snippet: The dataset supports both chain-like and fan-out structures and provides explicit multi-hop reasoning annotations for step-level evaluation beyond answer accuracy.

Rater Population

missing

Unknown

Confidence: Low Source: Persisted extraction missing

Rater source not explicitly reported.

Evidence snippet: Multi-hop question answering (QA) is widely used to evaluate the reasoning capabilities of large language models, yet most benchmarks focus on final answer correctness and overlook intermediate reasoning, especially in long multimodal documents.

Human Data Lens

  • Uses human feedback: No
  • Feedback types: None
  • Rater population: Unknown
  • Unit of annotation: Unknown
  • Expertise required: General
  • Extraction source: Persisted extraction

Evaluation Lens

  • Evaluation modes: Automatic Metrics
  • Agentic eval: None
  • Quality controls: Not reported
  • Confidence: 0.35
  • Flags: low_signal, possible_false_positive

Protocol And Measurement Signals

Benchmarks / Datasets

No benchmark or dataset names were extracted from the available abstract.

Reported Metrics

accuracy

Research Brief

Deterministic synthesis

Multi-hop question answering (QA) is widely used to evaluate the reasoning capabilities of large language models, yet most benchmarks focus on final answer correctness and overlook intermediate reasoning, especially in long multimodal… HFEPX signals include Automatic Metrics with confidence 0.35. Updated from current HFEPX corpus.

Generated Mar 13, 2026, 5:21 AM · Grounded in abstract + metadata only

Key Takeaways

  • Multi-hop question answering (QA) is widely used to evaluate the reasoning capabilities of large language models, yet most benchmarks focus on final answer correctness and…
  • We introduce BRIDGE, a benchmark for multi-hop reasoning over long scientific papers that require integrating evidence across text, tables, and figures.

Researcher Actions

  • Treat this as method context, then pivot to protocol-specific HFEPX hubs.
  • Identify benchmark choices from full text before operationalizing conclusions.
  • Validate metric comparability (accuracy).

Caveats

  • Generated from title, abstract, and extracted metadata only; full-paper implementation details are not parsed.
  • Low-signal flag detected: protocol relevance may be indirect.

Research Summary

Contribution Summary

  • Multi-hop question answering (QA) is widely used to evaluate the reasoning capabilities of large language models, yet most benchmarks focus on final answer correctness and overlook intermediate reasoning, especially in long multimodal…
  • We introduce BRIDGE, a benchmark for multi-hop reasoning over long scientific papers that require integrating evidence across text, tables, and figures.
  • The dataset supports both chain-like and fan-out structures and provides explicit multi-hop reasoning annotations for step-level evaluation beyond answer accuracy.

Why It Matters For Eval

  • We introduce BRIDGE, a benchmark for multi-hop reasoning over long scientific papers that require integrating evidence across text, tables, and figures.
  • The dataset supports both chain-like and fan-out structures and provides explicit multi-hop reasoning annotations for step-level evaluation beyond answer accuracy.

Researcher Checklist

  • Gap: Human feedback protocol is explicit

    No explicit human feedback protocol detected.

  • Pass: Evaluation mode is explicit

    Detected: Automatic Metrics

  • Gap: Quality control reporting appears

    No calibration/adjudication/IAA control explicitly detected.

  • Gap: Benchmark or dataset anchors are present

    No benchmark/dataset anchor extracted from abstract.

  • Pass: Metric reporting is present

    Detected: accuracy

Category-Adjacent Papers (Broader Context)

These papers are nearby in arXiv category and useful for broader context, but not necessarily protocol-matched to this paper.

Need human evaluators for your AI research? Scale annotation with expert AI Trainers.

Post a Job Get a Quote