HalluPrism: When Multimodal Uncertainty Should Diagnose, Not Decide
Read the original on arXiv Machine Learning →The Flow has not summarised this story yet — read it at arXiv Machine Learning.
The Flow has not summarised this story yet — read it at arXiv Machine Learning.
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:2606. 15782v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Multimodal large language models (MLLMs) have demonstrated strong capabilities in vision-language understanding and natural-language response generation.
arXiv:2607. 22034v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Vision-language models (VLMs) are increasingly deployed on consumer hardware where input images are degraded by compression, camera shake, and poor lighting.
arXiv:2608. 03817v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large vision--language models (LVLMs) demonstrate strong multimodal reasoning capabilities but remain prone to hallucination, where model predictions are not grounded in visual evidence.
arXiv:2609.00868v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Vision-language models are evaluated by aggregate accuracy on multimodal benchmarks, a practice that implicitly assumes the model uses its visual inp...
arXiv:2608. 13267v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Existing vision-language model (VLM) benchmarks emphasize perception and reasoning accuracy (how well VLMs describe and reason about what they see in an image), with limited attention to behavioral reliability under uncertainty (how they behave when visual evidence is missing or misleading).