BEAKER:面向自动驾驶化学实验室具身大脑的专家精选基准
BEAKER: An Expert-Curated Benchmark for Embodied Brains in Self-Driving Chemical Laboratories
Fei Lin · Tengchao Zhang · Ziyang Gong · Xiaotong Yu · Bohan Zhang · Yifan Zhou · et al.
中文摘要
自动驾驶化学实验室(Self-Driving Chemical Laboratories, SDCLs)正推动化学实验走向具身自动化,机器需感知实验室场景、推理实验状态,并在物理、流程与安全约束下行动。多模态大语言模型(Multimodal Large Language Models, MLLMs)日益被视为此类系统的具身大脑,但现有实验室基准多聚焦安全、异常检测或通用科学理解,对其面向执行的具身能力探索不足。为填补这一空白,提出 BEAKER,一个评估 SDCLs 中具身可操作性、知识、实验与推理的基准。BEAKER 包含 1,000 个专家精选问答样本,覆盖 11 种图像与视频任务类型,涵盖化学实验室执行所需的关键判断,包括可供性定位、轨迹规划、设备、状态与安全识别、装置搭建、操作与步骤推理以及时序流程推理。所有问题与标注均由化学与具身人工智能(AI)专家手工创建并审核,无 AI 辅助生成或标注。在离线单轮设置下评估了 28 个通用、科学导向、化学专用及具身 MLLMs。结果显示,当前模型能跟随视频中的粗略实验流程,但仍难以将动作定位到可操作区域与可行轨迹,难以识别细粒度实验室设备、状态与安全规范,也难以对中等长度流程的步骤排序。BEAKER 由此揭示粗略流程理解与实验室执行所需的精确、动作定位感知之间的明显差距,为未来 SDCLs 中的 MLLMs 提供诊断性基准。
关键要点
- 01现有实验室基准多关注安全与通用科学理解,缺少对 SDCLs 执行导向具身能力的评估。
- 02BEAKER 含 1,000 个专家手工创建并审核的问答样本,覆盖 11 种图像与视频任务类型。
- 03评估 28 个通用、科学、化学专用及具身 MLLMs,采用离线单轮设置。
- 04模型能跟随粗略实验流程,但动作定位、细粒度设备识别与步骤排序仍表现不足。
- 05基准揭示粗略流程理解与精确动作定位感知之间的差距,可作为诊断工具。
解读
尚无解读。
原始英文摘要
arXiv:2611.06911v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Self-Driving Chemical Laboratories (SDCLs) are moving chemical experimentation toward embodied automation, where machines must perceive laboratory scenes, reason about experimental states, and act under physical, procedural, and safety constraints. Although Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) are increasingly considered as embodied brains for such systems, existing laboratory benchmarks mainly focus on safety, anomaly detection, or general scientific understanding, leaving their execution-oriented embodied capabilities underexplored. To fill this gap, we introduce BEAKER, a Benchmark for evaluating Embodied Actionability, Knowledge, Experimentation, and Reasoning in SDCLs. BEAKER contains 1,000 expert-curated question-answer samples across 11 image and video task types, covering key judgments required for chemical laboratory execution, including affordance grounding, trajectory planning, equipment, state, and safety recognition, apparatus setup, operation and step reasoning, and temporal procedure reasoning. All questions and annotations are manually created and reviewed by chemistry and embodied Artificial Intelligence (AI) experts, without AI-assisted generation or annotation. We evaluate 28 general-purpose, science-oriented, chemistry-specialized, and embodied MLLMs in an offline, single-turn setting. Results show that current models can follow coarse experimental procedures in videos, but still struggle to ground actions into operable regions and feasible trajectories, to recognize fine-grained laboratory apparatus, states, and safety norms, and to order steps in mid-length procedures. BEAKER thus reveals a clear gap between coarse procedural understanding and the precise, action-grounded perception required for laboratory execution, providing a diagnostic benchmark for future MLLMs in SDCLs.