Can MLLMs Decode the Creative Leap? Introducing C4 for Cross-Concept Understanding
Abstract
Creative capabilities of MLLMs matter in design, communication, education, and human--AI collaboration, yet remain difficult to evaluate because explicit targets and reward signals are scarce compared with accuracy-oriented tasks. Cross-concept understanding is a core cognitive capacity underlying receptive creativity. It enables a perceiver to recover intended meaning from non-obvious but meaningful conceptual relations. We operationalize item construction as cross-concept encoding and model inference as cross-concept decoding. We introduce C4, a cognition-inspired evaluation framework for Chengyu (Chinese idiom)-based Cross-Concept Creativity. Its encoding component maps target slots to imageable substitute concepts along bridge paths in a manually annotated and third-party-reviewed cross-concept network, enabling batch generation with explicit structure, difficulty indexed by bridge count and depth, and exact answers. Using this framework, we instantiate the C4 Evaluation Set (C4-Eval), comprising 184 synthetic items and 37 human-created cross-concept chengyu figures collected from online sources. We manually construct and review cross-concept relations, bridge paths, and reasoning processes for the collected figures. Each C4-Eval item is instantiated in five task settings, yielding 884 primary answer-recovery cases. Across ten evaluated MLLMs, the strongest closed models reach 50.7% and 48.0% primary accuracy, while open-source models remain substantially lower. Candidate constraints improve accuracy sharply, but bridge hints and explanation requests provide only modest gains. These results expose a substantial gap in how current MLLMs decode creatively encoded meaning through cross-concept relations. The code is in the supplementary material.
Community
Inspired by cognitive science, we used Chinese idioms (or Chengyu) as a vehicle to design a cross-concept comprehension task as an anchor for assessing the creative ability of MLLMs, and we created a leaderboard.
This is an automated message from the Librarian Bot. I found the following papers similar to this paper.
The following papers were recommended by the Semantic Scholar API
- Computational Humor with Multimodal LLMs: Methods, Datasets, Evaluation, and Challenges (2026)
- Show, Don't Tell: Evaluating Spatial Cognition in Generative Pixels Rather Than LLM Text (2026)
- Douyin Multimodal Embedding Model Technical Report (2026)
- ROSE: Benchmarking the Perception-to-Action Gap in Multimodal Models (2026)
- PerceptionBench: Evaluating Atomic Visual Perception in Multimodal Large Language Models (2026)
- Mixture of Cognitive Experts in Large Vision-Language Models (2026)
- Ask, Solve, Generate: Self-Evolving Unified Multimodal Understanding and Generation via Self-Consistency Rewards (2026)
Please give a thumbs up to this comment if you found it helpful!
If you want recommendations for any Paper on Hugging Face checkout this Space
You can directly ask Librarian Bot for paper recommendations by tagging it in a comment: @librarian-bot recommend
Get this paper in your agent:
hf papers read 2608.06501 Don't have the latest CLI?
curl -LsSf https://hf.co/cli/install.sh | bash Models citing this paper 0
No model linking this paper
Datasets citing this paper 1
Spaces citing this paper 0
No Space linking this paper