arXiv:2609.37709v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: Recent multimodal image generation models can take multiple images and textual instructions as input, enabling reference-based generation guided not...
By Yuta Oshima, Masakazu Yoshimura, Masahiro Suzuki, Yutaka Matsuo, Hiroki Furuta
arXiv:2607. 00491v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Benchmarks for vision-language models (VLMs) mostly test observational spatial reasoning: models describe relations already visible in the input.
By Leyuan Yu, Xiao Tang, Minghao Liu, Xinyuan Li, Xiaokai Bai, Sheng Zhou, Qunshu Lin, Weihao Xuan, Naoto Yokoya
arXiv:2609.00663v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Multimodal evaluations cannot say whether a vision-language model misread an image or misreasoned about it, because every existing method for separatin...
By Can Polat, Mustafa Kurban, Erchin Serpedin, Hasan Kurban
T2LSC-Bench is a new benchmark for evaluating localized semantic control in text-to-image generation, consisting of 50 seed subjects and 1,200 prompt cases per model, producing 7,160 images across six models. The benchmark measures Text-at-Anchor Accuracy, Semantic Subject Preservation, Semantic Leakage Rate, and Conditional Semantic Leakage Rate using a dual‑branch protocol that combines OCR‑VLM verification with structured VLM semantic judgments. Results show that while accurate text rendering remains high, semantic leakage can increase dramatically under stress‑test conditions, and anti‑leakage prompting can reduce leakage without harming rendering accuracy.
By Yan Wang, Xinyi Hou, Weiguo Lin, Junjun Si, Siwei Ma
arXiv:2608.21762v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: Vision-language models (VLMs) fail many detail-centric questions for a concrete reason: the answer is visible in the image, yet lost after the image...
By Jinchang Zhu, Rong Fu, Yi Ding, Chenghao Wu, Ying Liu, Menglin Yang
arXiv:2509. 12046v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Although autoregressive (AR) models have demonstrated remarkable success in image generation, extending these models to layout-conditioned generation remains challenging due to the sparse nature of layout conditions and the risk of feature entanglement.
By Zirui Zheng, Takashi Isobe, Tong Shen, Xu Jia, Jianbin Zhao, Xiaomin Li, Mengmeng Ge, Baolu Li, Qinghe Wang, Dong Li, Dong Zhou, Yunzhi Zhuge, Huchuan Lu, Emad Barsoum
arXiv:2607. 25537v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: In the age of foundation models, a model is only as good as its prompt.
By Robert Geirhos, Yuxuan Li, Thadd\"aus Wiedemer, Neha Kalibhat, Zi Wang, Mani Malek, Oyvind Tafjord, Kevin Swersky, Been Kim, Priyank Jaini
arXiv:2603. 08652v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Recent advancements in Unified Multimodal Models (UMMs) have significantly advanced text-to-image (T2I) generation, particularly through the integration of Chain-of-Thought (CoT) reasoning.
By Haodong Li, Chunmei Qing, Huanyu Zhang, Dongzhi Jiang, Yihang Zou, Hongbo Peng, Dingming Li, Yuhong Dai, ZePeng Lin, Juanxi Tian, Yi Zhou, Siqi Dai, Jingwei Wu, Pheng-Ann Heng
arXiv:2609.36219v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Perspective taking is a fundamental component of spatial intelligence, requiring models interpret spatial relations from a specified viewpoint, such as...
By Bang Xiao, Wenqi Jia, Ozgur Kara, Tiancheng Shen, Yibo Yang, Bolin Lai, Junho Kim, James Matthew Rehg
The paper investigates why reasoning‑augmented text‑to‑image models like GoT‑R1 sometimes fail on compositional prompts. By separating the explicit textual plan from the decoder, the authors show that the decoder faithfully executes the plan while the planner often writes incorrect spatial relations, especially for phrasing‑dependent cues. Editing or replacing the plan improves image quality without retraining, demonstrating the viability of modular planner‑decoder architectures.
By Ashritha Gonuguntla
arXiv:2608.21832v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Computer-use agents ground natural-language instructions in screenshots to locate interface elements, yet existing benchmarks do not isolate whether mo...
By Md Abrar Jahin, Md Rizwan Parvez
VTR-Bench is a new benchmark designed to evaluate how well video generation models render text within scenes. It includes 300 prompts across five real-world scenarios such as advertisements and scientific videos, and uses an automated pipeline with human alignment to assess text fidelity and scene/motion requirements. Experiments on 11 state‑of‑the‑art models show that even the best performer has a word error rate of 0.250, underscoring widespread challenges in visual text rendering.
By Yu Huang, Jungang Li, Zhiyuan Wang, Yonghua Hei, Song Dai, Jiayu Yang, Deyuan Liu, Xiang Zheng, Xiaoshuang Shi, Hao Cheng, Kaidi Xu