The Flow has not summarised this story yet — read it at arXiv Computation and Language.
arXiv:2608. 00410v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Human language is highly polysemous.
TRIAD is a new benchmark designed to test omni‑modal large language models’ ability to resolve ambiguity across text, vision, and audio. Each item consists of a text–image–audio triplet, a question, and answer options, crafted so that all three modalities together yield a unique answer while any single modality leaves the answer ambiguous. The benchmark contains 327 hand‑written queries in 86 scene groups, covering 18 ambiguity categories, and shows that current models lag humans significantly in scene‑level disambiguation, especially when answer options are removed.
TRIAD is a new benchmark designed to test omni‑modal large language models’ ability to resolve ambiguity across text, vision, and audio. Each item consists of a text–image–audio triplet, a question, and answer options, constructed so that the full triplet yields a unique answer while any single modality removed makes the answer ambiguous. The benchmark includes 327 queries in 86 scene groups, covering 18 ambiguity categories, and shows that current models lag humans in scene‑level disambiguation, especially when answer options are removed.
The study examines how vision‑language models handle multi‑turn pragmatic interpretation in iterated reference games, where participants repeatedly identify novel referents using language. Researchers compared human performance with that of several models, manipulating context by varying its amount, order, and relevance. While humans consistently performed well, the models could use prior context but struggled to build relevant context for effective interpretation, indicating missing core skills for efficient linguistic collaboration.
arXiv:2608.21853v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models are increasingly moving beyond text processing, adding support for other modalities such as images and audio. While text understa...
The paper compares two approaches to pragmatic intent recognition in human‑robot interaction: FISER, which uses structured symbolic reasoning, and CEMIR, which enriches textual prompts with synthetic narratives and images. Experiments across four large language models on the HandMeThat v2 benchmark show no statistically significant performance difference between the two methods, regardless of model size or ambiguity difficulty. The results indicate that when task constraints are already present in the text, multimodal enrichment offers no measurable advantage over structured reasoning.