The paper evaluates Vision Language Models (VLMs) on Visual Question Answering tasks where questions violate Grice's maxims. By generating question modifiers that add non-essential, ambiguous, or false information, the authors show that VLMs such as ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, and Llava exhibit reduced performance. They also compare human pragmatic reasoning to VLM reasoning, noting differences in how each handles human‑induced versus AI‑generated violations, and find that humans spend less time resolving VLM‑induced violations while VLMs are less accurate in those cases.
arXiv:2607. 15565v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Where should the question go in a vision-language model (VLM) prompt: before the image or after it?
Vision‑language models (VLMs) can lose accuracy when images are resized, even with minimal changes. The study shows that such small visual configuration changes—like tiling or token arrangement—cause more correctness flips across multiple checkpoints and benchmarks. Interestingly, in many cases the models still read the correct answer but fail to use it, and attention interventions reveal that configuration shifts weaken the use of readable information. By guiding models with field cues and their own transcriptions, the authors correct 97.2% of these errors.
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.
Hob‑VL is a benchmark for visually grounded Boolean reasoning that tests models on two tasks: determining whether a Boolean rule holds in an image and identifying the unique object that satisfies a Boolean description. It contains 6,000 balanced Yes/No questions built from ten visual statements across 1,000 generated scenes and 46 labeled photographs, plus 1,000 object‑identification questions on the same photographs. The questions are designed to challenge reasoning with misleading local cues, nested logical operations, and both symbolic and natural‑language presentations, revealing significant gaps in current model performance.
arXiv:2603. 16728v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Vision-language models (VLMs) are increasingly deployed in high-stakes settings where reliable uncertainty quantification (UQ) is as important as predictive accuracy.
arXiv:2603. 06054v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: The use of Vision-Language Models (VLMs) in automated driving applications is becoming increasingly common, with the aim of leveraging their reasoning and generalisation capabilities to handle long-tail scenarios.
The paper shows that the wording of prompts in vision‑language models (VLMs) can either improve or worsen robustness to image corruption. Verbose prompts broaden the cross‑modal attention’s frequency filter, making the model less sensitive to corruptions, while semantically complex prompts narrow the filter and increase vulnerability. Experiments on Qwen3‑VL and LLaVA‑OneVision confirm that adding padding or verbose phrasing reduces answer drift by 70–81% on 8B models.
arXiv:2607. 16165v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Human vision is a closed loop: gaze is continuously redirected by intermediate hypotheses rather than a single snapshot.
MedProb is a lightweight probing framework that predicts multiple-choice medical visual question answering (Med‑VQA) answers directly from frozen vision‑language model (VLM) representations, avoiding free‑text generation. On datasets such as PATH‑VQA, SLAKE, and VQA‑RAD, MedProb extracts more answer‑relevant signal than prompting and outperforms both medical VLMs and agentic systems. The approach also narrows the performance gap between small and large models, shows that medical adaptation does not consistently improve linear decodability, and reveals positional biases in both prompting and generation.
arXiv:2606. 13929v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Vision-language models (VLMs) are typically trained as passive answerers, while their ability to actively ask diverse, non-trivial, visual-centric and grounded questions remains underexplored.
arXiv:2610.01180v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Despite the strong performance of Vision-Language Models (VLMs) on a wide range of visual question answering (VQA) tasks, these models consistently str...
NoteVQA is a new benchmark that collects 252 real‑life visual questions from the Chinese image‑sharing platform Xiaohongshu, covering 12 topics and 7 user intents. Each question is paired with a concise expert reference and a human‑audited interleaved answer that blends text and visual evidence. The study evaluates VLMs on short‑answer correctness and interleaved answer quality using a new AgenticInterleave framework and a 12‑dimensional IVR‑12 rubric, finding that even state‑of‑the‑art models achieve only about 53% accuracy and lag behind human references in content quality.