arXiv:2606. 13156v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Letting a vision-language model (VLM) think longer at test time has driven much recent progress.
arXiv:2606. 13156v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Vision-language models (VLMs) achieve strong singleshot spatial grounding, yet lack any mechanism to observe and correct their own predictions.
arXiv:2603. 06828v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: We uncover a behavioral law of long-horizon vision-language models: models that maintain temporally grounded beliefs generalize better.
The paper investigates how Vision‑Language Models (VLMs) often report high confidence even after self‑correcting or arriving at wrong answers, a phenomenon the authors attribute to the verbalized confidence being largely independent of the model’s reasoning trajectory. By analyzing content variation, token masking, and hesitation markers, the authors demonstrate that confidence does not adequately reflect the actual reasoning process and that calibration training can sometimes worsen this disconnect. To address this blind spot, they introduce the Trajectory‑Grounding Score (TGS) in two forms—TGS‑self and TGS‑pair—and propose TGS‑Bench, a suite of 10 benchmarks that reveal divergences between conventional calibration metrics and trajectory‑grounded confidence.
arXiv:2606. 16122v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Visual thinking should not only sound right; it should show its evidence.
arXiv:2607. 23125v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Post-training enables vision-language models (VLMs) to understand human instructions and perform various downstream tasks.
The paper introduces a framework that combines world models, which generate concrete visual rollouts of possible futures, with multimodal large language models (MLLMs) that perform abstract reasoning. It proposes a controlled concrete reasoning approach and a new training method called Privileged‑Future On‑Policy Self‑Distillation (PF‑OPSD), which uses ground‑truth future videos as privileged teacher context during training while the student model never sees true futures at test time. Experiments on two human‑verified benchmarks, VRQABench and OpenWorldQA, show that PF‑OPSD improves performance by about 10–11% over baselines and enhances robustness to noisy or conflicting rollouts.
The paper demonstrates that reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) can improve vision‑language benchmark performance even when models are trained without visual input. When real images are introduced at test time, models trained blind recover about half of the performance gain at 3B parameters and nearly four‑fifths at 7B, but extended real‑image training can erode grounding while benchmark gains persist. The authors propose a visual resolvability rule and show that requiring visual evidence for correct answers leads to significant improvements in target discovery and generalization to unseen question types, while controls confirm that the gains stem from actual visual grounding rather than artifacts.
World models and multimodal large language models (MLLMs) provide complementary capabilities for predicting future outcomes from static visual observations. World models can generate concrete visual rollouts of possible futures, while MLLMs can reason abstractly over questions, goals, and rules.
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.
The paper introduces a free, label‑free visual evidence signal that improves fine‑grained vision‑language reasoning. By selecting image crops that maximize the model’s answer distribution peak, the method locates answer‑bearing regions without training or annotations, boosting accuracy from 70 % to 85 %. The evidence gap also complements model confidence, enabling better correctness prediction and error flagging.
arXiv:2608. 06154v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Vision-language models (VLMs) are increasingly used as zero-shot controllers, but successful trajectories do not necessarily show that decisions are grounded in visual input: simulator dynamics and conservative action priors can produce favourable scores without meaningful perception.
arXiv:2609.13308v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: A companion evaluation found that naming the target part in a manipulation prompt increased action accuracy by 0.32-0.63 across eight vision-language...