Humans naturally possess the spatial reasoning ability to form and manipulate images and structures of objects in space. There is an increasing effort to endow Vision-Language Models (VLMs) with similar spatial reasoning capabilities. However, it remains unclear whether these models truly understand and manipulate spatial objects or not. To address this question, we propose a new evaluation framework aimed at assessing the performance of VLMs in spatial deformation reasoning tasks. Specifically, we construct a benchmark for spatial deformation reasoning from 2D to 3D. We explore whether the model can effectively perform spatial deformation reasoning from two directions: forward reasoning (given the operations, find the final state) and reverse reasoning (given the final state, determine the operations). We adopt a ladder competition format, using the number of deformation steps as the level classification criterion, with the goal of exploring the boundaries of the model’s deformation reasoning capabilities. Interestingly, the benchmarking results reveal that almost no model demonstrates plausible spatial deformation reasoning abilities. Furthermore, even after applying targeted training and mainstream reasoning enhancement methods, the models are still unable to perform well on 3D spatial deformation reasoning.

Structured representations, exemplified by Abstract Meaning Representation (AMR), have long been pivotal in computational linguistics. However, their role remains ambiguous in the Large Language Models (LLMs) era. Initial attempts to integrate structured representation into LLMs via a zero-shot setting yielded inferior performance. We hypothesize that such a decline stems from the structure information being passed into LLMs in a code format unfamiliar to LLMs’ training corpora. Consequently, we propose SR-LLM, an innovative framework with two settings to explore a superior way of integrating structured representation with LLMs from training-free and training-dependent perspectives. The former integrates structural information through natural language descriptions in LLM prompts, whereas its counterpart augments the model’s inference capability through fine-tuning on linguistically described structured representations. Performance improvements were observed in widely downstream datasets, with particularly notable gains of 3.17% and 12.38% in PAWS. To the best of our knowledge, this work represents the pioneering demonstration that leveraging structural representations can substantially enhance LLMs’ inference capability. We hope that our work sheds light and encourages future research to enhance the reasoning and interoperability of LLMs by structure data.