arXiv Computer Vision

Coupled or Independent? Fault Coupling in Agentic Medical Vision Systems

The paper investigates how vision‑language agents that expose intermediate outputs can be affected when the sensor reading is unreliable, causing both the tool and reasoning channels to share a visual fault. Using a dermatology agent on the PAD‑UFES‑20 dataset, the authors introduce a fault‑coupling taxonomy distinguishing single‑channel errors from joint errors that agree or disagree, and show that typographic injection leads to detectable directional retrieval errors while physical corruption does not. They find that crop‑first retrieval yields a higher rate of joint wrong agreement (55%) compared to full‑image retrieval (35%), and that hard‑label channel comparison struggles to detect joint failures, limiting disagreement recall to 0.29 for crop‑first and 0.57 for full‑image retrieval, with similar effects observed on the HIBA test set.

arXiv Computer Vision
Oct 7

SalArt-VQA: Diagnosing Whether VLMs Understand Salient Artifacts in Generated Images

SalArt-VQA is a diagnostic benchmark that tests whether vision‑language models can understand salient artifacts in AI‑generated images. It includes 950 images and 3,681 multiple‑choice questions that assess artifact presence, semantic localization, spatial grounding, and evidence‑grounded defect identification. The benchmark reveals that high image‑level detection accuracy can mask failures in grounded understanding, showing a trade‑off between sensitivity and calibration.

By Ruotian Zhang, Xiaoxiao Sun, Junzhe Huang, James Burgess, Serena Yeung-Levy
arXiv AI
Aug 12

MIRA: Medical Image Reflection for Agentic Diagnosis

arXiv:2608. 10827v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Medical visual agents can use tools to inspect images and retrieve external knowledge, but indiscriminate tool use may introduce noisy or misleading evidence.

By Shengzhi Wang, Jun Yang, Kai Wu, Xiaozhong Ji, Yiwen Ye, Ziyang Chen, Mingliang Xiong, Wen Fang, Mingqing Liu, Mengyuan Xu, Miaoxuan Shan, Caiyan Liu, Bin He, Qingwen Liu
arXiv AI
Sep 10

Beyond the Verdict: Evidence-Aligned Evaluation of Visual Prompt-Injection Guardrails

The paper introduces Mind2Web-Injection, a benchmark of 9,954 instruction‑screenshot pairs designed to evaluate whether vision‑language models (VLMs) use visual evidence when judging conflicts between on‑screen text and user instructions. Across six VLMs, models with similar overall precision can differ dramatically in Evidence‑Aligned Detection (EAD), revealing that verdict‑only metrics miss critical grounding failures. The authors also propose two training‑free interventions—ReadGate and CmdCompare—to improve evidence grounding and instruction‑command consistency, and argue for separate reporting of verdict correctness, evidence localization, and counterfactual responsiveness.

By Suyoung Lee, Myungsub Choi
arXiv AI
Jul 21

Seeing What Is Actually There: PriVE-Bench and PriVE-Tools for Counterfactual Evaluation of Agentic Visual Evidence in VLMs

arXiv:2607. 16311v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Vision-language models (VLMs) often answer visual questions using learned language and category priors rather than grounding their predictions in the image itself.

By Jingyu Sun, Jiachen Tu, Yuyang Xue, Yaoxin Jiang, Guoyi Xu, Zhengtao Yao, Rui Qian, Yizheng Sun, Hongpeng Zhou, Jingyuan Sun, Yan Lin