Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

VFaith: Do Large Multimodal Models Really Reason on Seen Images Rather than Previous Memories?

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 2506.11571 v2 pith:QGYL42RE submitted 2025-06-13 cs.CV

VFaith: Do Large Multimodal Models Really Reason on Seen Images Rather than Previous Memories?

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

Recent extensive works have demonstrated that by introducing long CoT, the capabilities of MLLMs to solve complex problems can be effectively enhanced. However, the reasons for the effectiveness of such paradigms remain unclear. It is challenging to analysis with quantitative results how much the model's specific extraction of visual cues and its subsequent so-called reasoning during inference process contribute to the performance improvements. Therefore, evaluating the faithfulness of MLLMs' reasoning to visual information is crucial. To address this issue, we first present a cue-driven automatic and controllable editing pipeline with the help of GPT-Image-1. It enables the automatic and precise editing of specific visual cues based on the instruction. Furthermore, we introduce VFaith-Bench, the first benchmark to evaluate MLLMs' visual reasoning capabilities and analyze the source of such capabilities with an emphasis on the visual faithfulness. Using the designed pipeline, we constructed comparative question-answer pairs by altering the visual cues in images that are crucial for solving the original reasoning problem, thereby changing the question's answer. By testing similar questions with images that have different details, the average accuracy reflects the model's visual reasoning ability, while the difference in accuracy before and after editing the test set images effectively reveals the relationship between the model's reasoning ability and visual perception. We further designed specific metrics to expose this relationship. VFaith-Bench includes 755 entries divided into five distinct subsets, along with an additional human-labeled perception task. We conducted in-depth testing and analysis of existing mainstream flagship models and prominent open-source model series/reasoning models on VFaith-Bench, further investigating the underlying factors of their reasoning capabilities.

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Position, Not Provenance: Separating Reasoning Mediation from Sycophancy in Medical Vision-Language Models

    cs.LG 2026-07 conditional novelty 7.0

    CoT-Mediate shows that whether medical VLMs follow their own edited reasoning depends mostly on where it sits in the context window, not on who the text is attributed to.