REVIEW 1 cited by
Multimodal Rationales for Explainable Visual Question Answering
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
Visual Question Answering (VQA) is a challenging task of predicting the answer to a question about the content of an image. Prior works directly evaluate the answering models by simply calculating the accuracy of predicted answers. However, the inner reasoning behind the predictions is disregarded in such a "black box" system, and we cannot ascertain the trustworthiness of the predictions. Even more concerning, in some cases, these models predict correct answers despite focusing on irrelevant visual regions or textual tokens. To develop an explainable and trustworthy answering system, we propose a novel model termed MRVQA (Multimodal Rationales for VQA), which provides visual and textual rationales to support its predicted answers. To measure the quality of generated rationales, a new metric vtS (visual-textual Similarity) score is introduced from both visual and textual perspectives. Considering the extra annotations distinct from standard VQA, MRVQA is trained and evaluated using samples synthesized from some existing datasets. Extensive experiments across three EVQA datasets demonstrate that MRVQA achieves new state-of-the-art results through additional rationale generation, enhancing the trustworthiness of the explainable VQA model. The code and the synthesized dataset are released under https://github.com/lik1996/MRVQA2025.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Spatially Grounded Explanations in Vision Language Models for Document Visual Question Answering
EaGERS uses a vision language model's own explanation to mask a document image to relevant grid regions, then re-asks the question, improving DocVQA accuracy while grounding answers spatially.
Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.