arXiv:2609.26093v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Vision-language models can answer spatial relation questions confidently even when the image supports an incompatible relation. We formulate relation-g...
By Feixiang Liu, Qiang Qiu, Qingyang Li, Hui Xu
arXiv:2606. 10066v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Medical vision-language models (VLMs) are evaluated on public benchmarks whose images and question-answer pairs have been freely downloadable for years, yet reported accuracy assumes these examples were absent from pretraining.
By Bruce Changlong Xu, Lan Wu, Alexander Ryu
The paper argues that cross‑view correspondence, commonly used in agent evaluation and trace‑based learning, functions as a measurement intervention. Removing or altering this correspondence can create artificial sensitivity or invariance, and multiple optimal correspondences can obscure mechanism labels and learning credit. The authors propose a validity theory with two‑sided validation, all‑optima identification, and uncertainty propagation, and demonstrate through experiments that unvalidated correspondences can misattribute credit and erase harmful responses.
By Zhen Zhang, Ahmad Hafez, Amr Alanwar
arXiv:2609.13308v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: A companion evaluation found that naming the target part in a manipulation prompt increased action accuracy by 0.32-0.63 across eight vision-language...
By Sarthak Sattigeri
arXiv:2609.09417v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Vision-language models (VLMs) show promise for agricultural classification, but zero-shot performance on disease, pest, damage, quality, and species id...
By Earl Ranario, Jared Smith, Lars Lundqvist, Urmil Jatin Chandarana
arXiv:2608. 19807v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Vision-language models (VLMs) can estimate physical quantities such as duration, speed, and acceleration from visual observations, but existing benchmarks primarily assess overall model performance against annotated ground truth.
By Rongyu Yu, Ke Niu, Fengxiang He