arXiv:2609.35942v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Recent work in visual question answering has shown that vision-language models can exhibit strong reasoning capabilities by translating visual inputs i...
By Ting-Chih Chen, Emile van Krieken, Shujian Yu, Filip Ilievski
CoWorld Reasoner is an agentic framework that leverages a Video World Model (VWM) as a unified visual reasoning engine for Vision‑Language Models (VLMs). It exposes multiple visual operations through tools and skills, allowing the VLM to decide when to imagine, select an operation, generate visual content, and interpret the resulting evidence. The framework includes a VLM‑VWM Harness Co‑Evolution mechanism that jointly refines tools, skills, and execution code based on feedback, while keeping model weights fixed. Across seven benchmarks covering spatial, temporal, causal, and perceptual reasoning, CoWorld Reasoner outperforms direct VLM reasoning and improves accuracy on all benchmarks, achieving notable gains on MMSI and ERQA.
By Dongjie Cheng, Ruifeng Yuan, Ran Wei, Ning Song, Yongqi Li, Wenjie Li
VBVR-Pro is a closed‑loop testbed that enables native visual reasoning through generation, offering 300 procedurally generated tasks that scale training and allow strong transfer to external benchmarks. It supplies verifiable reward scorers based on deterministic, task‑specific rules, outperforming VLM‑as‑a‑judge approaches and providing reliable signals for reinforcement learning. The suite also facilitates controlled modality studies, revealing that video generation excels at persistent spatiotemporal tracking while interleaved generation offers a compute‑efficient alternative, and highlights the importance of vision‑native trajectories for reasoning.
By Junxiang Xu, Ruisi Wang, Fanyi Pu, Maijunxian Wang, Ran Ji, Tongxi Zhou, Chenyang Gu, Jing Zuo, Hongcan Xiao, Yimeng Geng, Wanqi Yin, Wei Chen, Oscar Qian, Zhengan Yan, Ziqi Huang, Haiwen Diao, Liang Pan, Bo Li, Xiangyu Fan, Dezhi Luo, Fengyuan Yu, Zehong Zhao, Qingying Gao, Tinghui Zhu, Yilan Zhang, Jingqi Tong, Pinyuan Feng, Zhengze Jiang, Letian Wang, Ziyu Guo, Renrui Zhang, Jieneng Chen, Sonia Joseph, Constantin Venhoff, Saman Motamed, Mengyue Yang, Chandra Sripada, Alan Yuille, Philip Torr, Lvmin Zhang, Vikash Kumar, Daniel Khashabi, Nikolaus Kriegeskorte, Rapha\"el Milli\`ere, Vincent C. M\"uller, Anyi Rao, Quan Wang, Ziwei Liu, Dahua Lin, Lei Yang, Hokin Deng, Zhongang Cai
arXiv:2606. 11576v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Modern Vision-Language Models (VLMs) benefit from chain-of-thought prompting and test-time scaling, but these gains often come with prohibitive inference cost due to large visual contexts and long decoding chains.
By Ahmadreza Jeddi, Minh Ngoc Le, Amirhossein Kazerouni, Hakki Can Karaimer, Hue Nguyen, Iqbal Mohomed, Michael Brudno, Alex Levinshtein, Konstantinos G. Derpanis, Babak Taati, Radek Grzeszczuk
The paper introduces FlipDir, a training‑free inference‑time technique that mitigates answer flips in vision‑language models by steering hidden states along a low‑rank subspace derived from contrastive image pairs. It employs a margin‑based gate to attenuate steering only during uncertain decoding steps, thereby restoring original predictions while keeping stable ones unchanged. The authors also present VisFlip, a benchmark framework that evaluates models across nine dataset‑variation combinations in scientific reasoning, robot‑scene understanding, and medical VQA, showing that FlipDir consistently outperforms existing methods on recovery and preservation metrics.
By Yeonsung Jung, Joonhyun Jeong, Hoang Pham, Joowon Kim, Yoonsik Park, Viet Dac Lai, Eunho Yang
arXiv:2608.22174v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Unified multimodal models (UMMs) can perform both understanding and generation, raising a central question: can visual generation improve understanding...
By Yubo Zhu, Zhehan Kan, Jingyi Yang, Miaolin Chen, Jinbo Xing, Kai Zhu, Zijian Wang, Sheng Zhong, Wei Tong
The paper introduces a method to retrofit depth recurrence into pretrained vision‑language models, reducing the language backbone’s parameter count by pruning layers and looping over the remaining ones with linear adapters. A three‑stage recovery training—language‑only pretraining, vision‑language projector alignment, and full fine‑tuning—helps recover performance, with distillation from the non‑recurrent model further improving results. Experiments on TinyLLaVA‑1.4B show the retrofitted recurrent model outperforms the unpruned baseline while saving 23.3% of language parameters and performs better on reasoning‑oriented benchmarks.
By Madhav Iyengar, Andreas Geiger, Hilde K\"uhne
arXiv:2512. 11995v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: While many vision-language models (VLMs) are developed to answer well-defined, straightforward questions with highly specified targets, as in most benchmarks, they often struggle in practice with complex open-ended tasks, which usually require multiple rounds of exploration and reasoning in the visual space.
By Chenrui Fan, Yijun Liang, Shweta Bhardwaj, Kwesi Cobbina, Ming Li, Tianyi Zhou
The paper introduces a progressive training strategy for embodied vision‑language models aimed at reducing spatio‑temporal hallucinations. It first creates a Chain‑of‑Thought dataset that breaks complex reasoning into detailed spatiotemporal steps, then uses supervised pre‑training on this dataset followed by fine‑tuning with weakly‑labeled data. Experiments show the method improves backbone accuracy and narrows the forward‑backward performance gap from over 70% to 6.53%, indicating stronger dynamic reasoning and fewer temporal biases.
By Xiaoda Yang, Shuai Yang, Can Wang, Jingyang Xue, Menglan Tang, Checheng Yu, Xunzhe Zhou, Sashuai Zhou, Tao Jin, Lixin Yang, Xiangyu Yue, Zhou Zhao
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...
By Yuliang Cai, Mohammad Rostami, Jesse Thomason
arXiv:2603. 23867v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Vision-Language Models (VLMs) have been applied to a wide range of reasoning tasks, yet it remains unclear whether they can reason robustly under distribution shifts.
By Weixin Chen, Antonio Vergari, Han Zhao
The paper investigates how the order of generating explanations—whether a rationale is produced before or after the answer—affects vision‑language reasoning. By conducting controlled experiments on knowledge‑intensive QA, visual entailment, and compositional grounding tasks, the authors show that larger models are required for reliable rationale‑first generation, while answer‑first generation is less susceptible to format errors. The study concludes that explanation ordering, model scale, pre‑training knowledge, fine‑tuning, and task structure jointly influence prediction accuracy and reasoning faithfulness.
By Siting Liang, Luca Rippe, Omar Adjali, Daniel Sonntag