arXiv Computer Vision

Visual Evidence Under Cross-Examination: Evaluating and Controlling Decision-Level Evidence Use in Vision-Language Models

arXiv Computer Vision
Sep 22

Pay More Attention To Text In High-Resolution MLLMs

The paper introduces EviSpec, a training‑free compiler that generates complementary evidence specifications to improve high‑resolution multimodal large language models (MLLMs). By explicitly guiding visual search with structured evidence specifications, EviSpec achieves significant relative gains—up to 14.8% over random evidence—across five MLLMs and three benchmarks, and also sets new state‑of‑the‑art results on VQA and hallucination‑focused tasks.

By Zhongkuan Mao, Wenzhuo Zhao, Xianjie Liu, Yidong Wang, Zhao Gao, Ronghao Xian, Yao Jiang, Yi Zhang, Liangjian Wen, Keren Fu
arXiv Computer Vision
Sep 22

Look Where It Counts: A Free, Label-Free Visual Evidence Signal for Fine-Grained Vision-Language Reasoning

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.

By Santi Ram Tiwari, Nihal Naik, Devbrat Pandey, Nishant Sinha
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
arXiv AI
Sep 1

LOCI: A Locator-Critic with Refinement Loop

LOC I (Locator‑Critic) is a training‑free framework that separates visual search from evidence verification in Vision‑Language Models. It uses a Locator agent to propose candidate visual evidence and a Critic agent to assess its relevance, engaging in an iterative refinement loop that progressively improves the evidence until it is sufficient to answer a question. The approach yields state‑of‑the‑art results on several complex visual benchmarks, boosting accuracy for both open‑weight models like Qwen3‑VL and proprietary models such as Gemini 2.5 Pro.

By Walid Bousselham, Mathilde Caron, Arsha Nagrani, Cordelia Schmid
arXiv AI
Sep 17

EDCT-Bench: Uncovering Faithfulness Gaps in VLMs via Explanation-Driven Counterfactual Testing

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
arXiv AI
Jun 19

SPOT-E: Test-Time Entropy Shaping with Visual Spotlights for Frozen VLMs

arXiv:2606. 20244v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Vision-language models (VLMs) often underperform on evidence intensive tasks because decisive visual evidence are small, localized, and easy to overlook, leading to failures in evidence readout even when high-level reasoning is intact.

By Bo Yin, Xiaobin Hu, Chengming Xu, Ruolin Shen, Mo Yang, Jiangning Zhang, Peng-Tao Jiang, Cheng Tan, Shuicheng YAN
arXiv AI
Jun 17

See First, Answer Later: Visual Evidence Pre-Alignment via Sufficiency-Driven RL

arXiv:2606. 17678v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Multimodal large language models (MLLMs) integrate strong text reasoning with visual inputs, yet their responses can be inconsistent with the underlying images, indicating ineffective utilization of visual evidence during inference.

By Yilian Liu, Sicong Leng, Guoshun Nan, Junyi Zhu, Jiayu Huang, Minghao Sun, Xuancheng Zhu, Yisong Chen, Zexian Wei, Xiaofeng Tao