The paper shows that controlled visual in‑context learning can help vision‑language models (VLMs) overcome errors caused by training priors. By providing demonstrations, the models focus more on visual evidence, yielding significant accuracy gains on counterfactual examples while leaving prior‑aligned performance largely unchanged. This effect is observed across five VLM families and five vision‑centric tasks, indicating that many VLMs possess latent visual grounding abilities that standard tests may miss.
By Kun Wang, Xindi Wu, Sanghyuk Chun, Olga Russakovsky, Esin Tureci
Multimodal large language models (MLLMs) have made strong progress on visual question answering and image captioning, yet they still produce fluent claims about objects, attributes, or relations that...
arXiv:2610.16977v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: Visual in-context learning (ICL) enables vision-language models (VLMs) to adapt at test time via demonstration examples, but its effectiveness depend...
By Shu Zhao, Tan Yu
SAVOR is a training framework for multimodal large language models that adds token and answer confidence to the output schema, optimises a Group Relative Policy Optimisation objective to penalise calibration error and poor abstention, and uses the learned confidence at inference to revisit visual evidence only when uncertain. Experiments on POPE, HallusionBench, AMBER, and MMHal-Bench with InternVL3-8B and Qwen3-VL-8B backbones show that SAVOR reduces hallucination while maintaining general capability on MME and MMBench, achieving lower Expected Calibration Error than DPO and decoding baselines.
By Zixiu Ding, Zilin Zhao, Yingjie He, Xinlang Kang, Guansu Wang, Wei Zhang
Self-improvement for multimodal large language models (MLLMs) is typically driven by reward-based methods that provide only coarse scalar feedback. Distillation offers a richer alternative through dense token-level supervision, but in the visual domain it usually depends on privileged context constructed using external annotations and tools, or stronger models.
arXiv:2609.13228v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Vision Language Models (VLMs) should rely on visual evidence that directly determines the correct answer, but supervision for grounding visual reasonin...
By Marko Jojic, Zhaonan Li, Ben Zhou
arXiv:2604. 14888v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Recent advances in vision language models (VLMs) offer reasoning capabilities, yet how these unfold and integrate visual and textual information remains unclear.
By Danae S\'anchez Villegas, Samuel Lewis-Lim, Nikolaos Aletras, Desmond Elliott
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
The paper investigates how visual interventions—training‑free edits applied to multimodal large language models—affect hallucinations and prediction quality. By applying a visual‑residual edit across successive decoder layers and matching its RMS strength, the authors identify an Evidence Anchoring Boundary (EAB) where the intervention’s influence drops sharply; effects before the EAB are 13.78–26.10× larger than after it. They further compare counterfactual subtraction across different question types and introduce calibrated selective routing, which only alters predictions when calibration supports an intervention, improving attribute accuracy by 1.56–1.81 percentage points while avoiding the harms of universal subtraction.
By Qiji Zhou, Junyi Hu, Peiyu Wang, Yue Zhang
arXiv:2609.22234v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: Instruction hierarchy (IH) alignment teaches language models to prioritize higher-level instructions when inputs conflict. While studied primarily in...
By Nicholas Sansoterra, Zishuo Zheng, Sachin Kumar
EDCT-Bench is a benchmark that evaluates the faithfulness of Vision‑Language Models (VLMs) by using Explanation‑Driven Counterfactual Testing (EDCT). EDCT extracts visual concepts from a model’s natural language explanation, applies minimal verified edits to those concepts, and checks whether the model’s answer and explanation remain consistent with the edited image. The benchmark covers three domains—knowledge‑intensive VQA, safety‑critical driving, and 3D spatial reasoning—and reveals significant faithfulness gaps in current VLMs, while also showing that EDCT‑generated counterfactuals can improve training.
By Sihao Ding, Santosh Vasa, Aditi Ramadwar, Thomas Monninger
DVLA-RL++ introduces Dual-Level Vision‑Language Alignment with Reinforcement Learning Gating for few‑shot learning. It adds complementary semantic purification (CSP) to separate intrinsic from nuisance textual descriptions and counterfactual reinforcement‑learning gating (CRG) to learn layer‑wise fusion strengths. Experiments on standard, fine‑grained, and cross‑domain benchmarks demonstrate state‑of‑the‑art accuracy, improving on DVLA‑RL by an average of 1.4%.
By Wenhao Li, Xianjing Meng, Qiangchang Wang, Zhongyi Han, Yilong Yin, Liqiang Nie