Pith. sign in

REVIEW 6 cited by

Do Vision-Language Models Represent Space and How? Evaluating Spatial Frame of Reference Under Ambiguities

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 2410.17385 v2 pith:76FHTYSG submitted 2024-10-22 cs.CL cs.CV

Do Vision-Language Models Represent Space and How? Evaluating Spatial Frame of Reference Under Ambiguities

classification cs.CL cs.CV
keywords modelsspatialvlmsambiguitiesreasoningreferencevision-languageambiguous
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

Spatial expressions in situated communication can be ambiguous, as their meanings vary depending on the frames of reference (FoR) adopted by speakers and listeners. While spatial language understanding and reasoning by vision-language models (VLMs) have gained increasing attention, potential ambiguities in these models are still under-explored. To address this issue, we present the COnsistent Multilingual Frame Of Reference Test (COMFORT), an evaluation protocol to systematically assess the spatial reasoning capabilities of VLMs. We evaluate nine state-of-the-art VLMs using COMFORT. Despite showing some alignment with English conventions in resolving ambiguities, our experiments reveal significant shortcomings of VLMs: notably, the models (1) exhibit poor robustness and consistency, (2) lack the flexibility to accommodate multiple FoRs, and (3) fail to adhere to language-specific or culture-specific conventions in cross-lingual tests, as English tends to dominate other languages. With a growing effort to align vision-language models with human cognitive intuitions, we call for more attention to the ambiguous nature and cross-cultural diversity of spatial reasoning.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 6 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. When Do Diffusion Models learn to Generate Multiple Objects?

    cs.CV 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 8.0

    Diffusion models' multi-object generation is limited primarily by scene complexity and held-out combinations rather than imbalance, with counting difficult in low data and compositional generalization collapsing as mo...

  2. ProSR: Process-Shaped Spatial Reasoning for Reliable Chain-of-Thought in VLMs

    cs.CV 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    ProSR adds a Counterfactual Invariance Penalty and a Tail Drift Penalty to shape VLM reasoning trajectories for better visual dependence and stability on spatial tasks.

  3. When Do Diffusion Models learn to Generate Multiple Objects?

    cs.CV 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Using the mosaic controlled dataset framework, experiments show scene complexity dominates over concept imbalance in diffusion model failures for multi-object generation, with counting especially hard in low-data regi...

  4. OmniView-Space: Reinforcing Spatial Reasoning via Multi-Perspective Spatial Mapping

    cs.CV 2026-07 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    OmniView-Space framework with MPSM, tool-guided reasoning, and distillation achieves SOTA on spatial reasoning benchmarks for MLLMs while reducing external geometry dependencies.

  5. IntentNav: Learning Spatial-Visual Object Navigation from Human Demonstrations

    cs.RO 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    IntentNav is a spatial-visual imitation framework that infers human search intent via frontier labeling to train VLM policies for object navigation, reporting SOTA on MP3D and HM3D benchmarks with zero-shot transfer t...

  6. AutoSpatial: Visual-Language Reasoning for Social Robot Navigation through Efficient Spatial Reasoning Learning

    cs.RO 2025-03 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    AutoSpatial improves VLM spatial reasoning for social navigation by combining minimal manual supervision with auto-labeled VQA pairs and hierarchical training, showing gains up to 20.5% in action prediction over baselines.