The paper introduces MOTIVE, a multi-view self-verification framework for vision-language models that evaluates candidate answers from complementary perspectives and learns a reliability score aligned with correctness. By using this score to decide whether to accept an answer or trigger history-guided rethinking, MOTIVE improves reliability and efficiency compared to existing self-verification and self-correction methods. Extensive experiments on diverse multimodal benchmarks and VLM backbones show consistent performance gains and reduced unnecessary reasoning turns.
arXiv:2607. 10966v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: We introduce Self-Verified Reasoner (SVR-R1), a multi-turn RL framework that turns a model's own verification into a learning signal for multimodal reasoning.
The paper introduces LIFT, a lightweight vector‑intervention technique that transfers reasoning capability from a base large language model (LLM) to a vision‑language model (VLM) without retraining the VLM backbone. LIFT defines Reasoning Vectors as differences in hidden states between a reasoning path with an explicit trace and a solver path without it, and injects these vectors into the VLM’s language‑side activations. Experiments on two VLMs across six reasoning benchmarks show that vectors derived from the base LLM consistently outperform those derived from the aligned VLM, indicating that the base LLM is a more effective source for recovering degraded reasoning. "whyItMatters":"The study demonstrates that a simple, frozen‑backbone intervention can partially restore reasoning abilities in multimodal models, highlighting the value of leveraging the original language model’s reasoning power."
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.
arXiv:2609.39168v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards (RLVR) has improved the reasoning capabilities of Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs), yet existing...
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:2609.37656v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large vision-language models (LVLMs) exhibit strong reasoning capabilities, yet the visual and textual evidence supporting the generated responses rema...
arXiv:2607.28225v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Agentic vision-language models (VLMs), which interleave textual reasoning with explicit tool calls such as cropping and code-based image manipulati...
arXiv:2608. 08326v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) has emerged as an effective approach for improving multimodal reasoning.
Multimodal large language models (MLLMs) have demonstrated strong capabilities in vision-language understanding and natural-language response generation. However, these systems can still produce overconfident predictions and hallucination-like outputs, particularly when the visual evidence is weak, ambiguous, or semantically inconsistent.
arXiv:2609.00232v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) have achieved strong performance on OCR-centric document understanding and text-rich visual reasoning benchmar...
arXiv:2605. 14054v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Achieving robust perception-reasoning synergy is a central goal for advanced Vision-Language Models (VLMs).
arXiv:2606. 02578v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Recent multimodal large language models have demonstrated strong reasoning ability, yet their reliability as automated evaluators remains limited by a critical weakness: when visual evidence conflicts with textual cues, MLLM judges tend to reward plausible narratives over perceptually correct answers.