The paper investigates how different multimodal design choices affect the performance of misinformation detection systems. Using over 3,375 experiments across three benchmark datasets and various pre‑trained vision and language models, the authors systematically compare design options and conduct robustness analyses. The study offers practical guidance on which choices improve detection, when they may fail silently, and which pipeline components most influence model behavior, addressing four key research questions.
arXiv:2512.20257v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: With the rise of easily accessible generative tools for creating and manipulating multimedia content, the threat of realistic synthetic alterations...
arXiv:2606. 03348v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Recent generative models can now produce visual artifacts with realistic embedded text and layouts, creating a new misinformation threat: synthetic credibility.
arXiv:2511.18921v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Backdoor attacks undermine the reliability and trustworthiness of machine learning systems by injecting hidden behaviors that can be maliciously ac...
arXiv:2606. 24112v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Multimodal misinformation detection is increasingly important because viral posts now combine long multilingual narratives, several images, mixed provenance, and subtle text--image framing errors.
arXiv:2610.00341v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: As Large Multimodal Models (LMMs) transition toward natively unified architectures, evaluating their safety in synergistic harmful image-text generat...
With the rapid adoption of generative AI, synthetic medical images pose growing risks, including diagnostic deception and insurance fraud. Although prior work has explored vision-language model (VLM)-based synthetic image detection, these evaluations typically consider images in isolation.
arXiv:2603. 28026v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Multimodal multiple-choice question answering (MCQA) provides a standardized and objectively measurable setting for evaluating vision-language models (VLMs).
arXiv:2606. 25375v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: With the rapid adoption of generative AI, synthetic medical images pose growing risks, including diagnostic deception and insurance fraud.
arXiv:2608.22232v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Real-world situation appearances can deviate from their underlying physical states, challenging the reliability of multimodal large language models (ML...
The paper investigates how multimodal large language models (MLLMs) handle conflicting evidence presented in text, image, or both forms. Across 13 MLLMs and two datasets, the authors find that models are not robust to knowledge conflict: they tend to accept contradictory image evidence more readily than contradictory text, and when both modalities conflict the preference is arbitrary, depending on input order, model, and dataset. The instability degrades multimodal retrieval-augmented generation and can be exploited by adversarial attacks, while simple mitigation techniques such as prompting, steering, and direct preference optimization largely fail, with supervised fine‑tuning offering only moderate improvement.
arXiv:2608. 03691v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Multimodal large language models (MLLMs) are increasingly used to translate webpage screenshots into front-end code, but repeated UI patterns may sway them toward visually incorrect yet pattern-consistent outputs.
The paper investigates whether multimodal large language models (MLLMs) can generate and detect realistic multimodal fake news on social media. Using a multi‑agent framework—comprising a story agent, an image agent, and a critic agent—the authors produced over 9,000 paired multimodal news posts across science, health, and entertainment domains. They benchmarked 16 open‑ and closed‑source MLLMs for automated detection and found that most models fall far short of human accuracy, especially in identifying image authenticity, highlighting the need for stronger defenses against social media fake news.