Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 cited by

Exploring Perceptual Limitation of Multimodal Large Language Models

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 2402.07384 v1 pith:FT4INJ2A submitted 2024-02-12 cs.CV cs.AIcs.LG

classification cs.CVcs.AIcs.LG
keywords mllmsobjectlimitationperceptionvisualansweringperceptualquestions
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) have recently shown remarkable perceptual capability in answering visual questions, however, little is known about the limits of their perception. In particular, while prior works have provided anecdotal evidence of MLLMs' sensitivity to object size, this phenomenon and its underlying causes have not been explored comprehensively. In this work, we quantitatively study the perception of small visual objects in several state-of-the-art MLLMs and reveal a pervasive limitation in answering questions about small objects in images. Next, we identify four independent factors that can contribute to this limitation -- object quality, size, distractors, and location -- and conduct controlled intervention studies to measure the effect of each factor on MLLMs' perception. In particular, we find that lower object quality and smaller object size can both independently reduce MLLMs' ability to answer visual questions. More surprisingly, we find that the location of the object in the image and the presence of visual distractors can also significantly reduce MLLMs' question answering accuracy. Our study provides a better understanding of the perceptual limitation of MLLMs and contributes new evaluation protocols for analyzing the perception of future MLLMs. To facilitate further investigations, we release our code and data.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

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

  1. Vision Language Models Cannot Reason About Physical Transformation

    cs.AI 2026-03 accept novelty 6.5 of 10

    Current VLMs cannot maintain transformation-invariant representations of number, length, volume or size and instead rely on textual invariance priors that reverse on matched non-conserving controls.

  2. Transferability Between Understanding and Generation in Unified Multimodal Models

    cs.CV 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Cross-task capability transfer in UMMs is architecture-dependent and can be exploited by training understanding to improve generation while avoiding distribution shift.

  3. Egocentric Bias in Vision-Language Models

    cs.CV 2026-02 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Most vision-language models fail Level-2 visual perspective taking: they report the camera's view rather than the 180°-rotated string, even though they often recognize that another agent sees differently.

Pith tools