arXiv:2608. 04496v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Visual inputs in vision-language models (VLMs) are often encoded into substantially longer token sequences than text, making visual tokens a major bottleneck for efficient inference.
By Chen Zhong, Xiao An, Zijie Wang, Jiepan Li, Guangyi Yang, Wei He
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
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
arXiv:2606. 00987v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs) have shown strong visual understanding and language-guided grounding abilities, yet their capacity for multi-temporal visual reasoning remains underexplored.
By Bingyu Li, Da Zhang, Tao Huo, Zhiyuan Zhao, Junyu Gao, Xuelong Li
arXiv:2606. 20244v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Vision-language models (VLMs) often underperform on evidence intensive tasks because decisive visual evidence are small, localized, and easy to overlook, leading to failures in evidence readout even when high-level reasoning is intact.
By Bo Yin, Xiaobin Hu, Chengming Xu, Ruolin Shen, Mo Yang, Jiangning Zhang, Peng-Tao Jiang, Cheng Tan, Shuicheng YAN
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