arXiv AI By Alexa R. Tartaglini, Zhengxuan Wu, Thadd\"aus Wiedemer, Martin Wattenberg, Been Kim, Yuxuan Li

A Heart Means Recursion: Exploring Visual Meaning and Communication in VLMs

Read the original on arXiv AI →

The paper investigates whether vision‑language models (VLMs) can communicate visually in ways similar to humans. It reports that simple visual symbols, such as a red heart, can unexpectedly steer VLMs toward recursive solutions in unrelated tasks, revealing a generation‑interpretation gap where models produce intuitive shapes that do not effectively influence other models. In more complex communication games, VLMs can creatively use visuals to convey abstract concepts, though some messages remain unintuitive to humans, highlighting both the potential and the challenges of visual communication between humans and VLMs.

Machine-generated by The Flow from the publisher's headline and feed description — not written or checked by a human. The full article lives at arXiv AI.

arXiv Computation and Language
21h ago

Vision-Default, Prior-Override: Causal Mechanisms of Perception-Knowledge Conflict in Vision-Language Models

The paper investigates how vision‑language models resolve conflicts between visual evidence and memorized knowledge. Using activation patching and ablation across residual streams, attention heads, and MLP sublayers, the authors find that visual grounding is the default behavior, while prior knowledge relies on a small, causally essential set of attention heads concentrated in the network’s second half. Ablating these heads flips knowledge‑grounded predictions to visually grounded ones in most cases, revealing an asymmetric causal structure and a sparse circuit of routing and writing heads that underlies perception‑knowledge conflict.

By Niclas Lietzow, Danielle Bitterman, Carsten Eickhoff, William Rudman, Michal Golovanevsky
arXiv Computer Vision
Oct 12

Feature Competition and Its Representational Origins in Vision Language Models: Evidence from the Stroop Paradigm

The paper investigates how vision‑language models (VLMs) resolve conflicts between image features using a Stroop‑style benchmark. By prompting contrastive and generative VLMs on images where text and color disagree, the authors find a consistent bias toward textual cues, with models preferring to respond based on text rather than color. Analysis of the embedding space reveals that textual signals are represented more strongly and separably than color signals, explaining why steering models toward text is easier than toward color.

By Nurb\"uke Teker, Rui Xiao, Zeynep Akata, Shuchen Wu
arXiv AI
Jun 11

MentisOculi: Revealing the Limits of Reasoning with Mental Imagery

arXiv:2602. 02465v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Frontier models are transitioning from multimodal large language models (MLLMs) that merely ingest visual information to unified multimodal models (UMMs) capable of native interleaved generation.

By Jana Zeller, Thadd\"aus Wiedemer, Fanfei Li, Thomas Klein, Prasanna Mayilvahanan, Matthias Bethge, Felix Wichmann, Ryan Cotterell, Wieland Brendel