Pith. sign in

REVIEW

How Well Can Vison-Language Models Understand Humans' Intention? An Open-ended Theory of Mind Question Evaluation Benchmark

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

arxiv 2503.22093 v2 pith:UI324YBA submitted 2025-03-28 cs.CV cs.AI

classification cs.CVcs.AI
keywords vlmsintentionsmodelsperformancequestiontasksbenchmarkdataset
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

Vision Language Models (VLMs) have demonstrated strong reasoning capabilities in Visual Question Answering (VQA) tasks; however, their ability to perform Theory of Mind (ToM) tasks, such as inferring human intentions, beliefs, and mental states, remains underexplored. We propose an open-ended question framework to evaluate VLMs' performance across diverse categories of ToM tasks. We curated and annotated a benchmark dataset of 30 images and evaluated the performance of four VLMs of varying sizes. Our results show that the GPT-4 model outperformed all the others, with only one smaller model, GPT-4o-mini, achieving comparable performance. We observed that VLMs often struggle to infer intentions in complex scenarios such as bullying or cheating. Our findings reveal that smaller models can sometimes infer correct intentions despite relying on incorrect visual cues. The dataset is available at https://github.com/ximingwen/ToM-AAAI25-Multimodal.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Pith tools