We present a simple experiment that exposes a fundamental limitation in vision-language models (VLMs): the inability to accurately localize filled cells in binary grids when those cells lack textual identity. We generate fifteen 15x15 grids with varying density (10.7%-41.8% filled cells) and render each as two image types -- text symbols (. and #) and filled squares without gridlines -- then ask three frontier VLMs (Claude Opus, ChatGPT 5.2, and Gemini 3 Thinking) to transcribe them. In the text-symbol condition, Claude and ChatGPT achieve approximately 91% cell accuracy and 84% F1, while Gemini achieves 84% accuracy and 63% F1. In the filled-squares condition, all three models collapse to 60-73% accuracy and 29-39% F1. Critically, all conditions pass through the same visual encoder -- the text symbols are images, not tokenized text. The text-vs-squares F1 gap ranges from 34 to 54 points across models, demonstrating that VLMs behave as if they possess a high-fidelity text-recognition pathway for spatial reasoning that dramatically outperforms their native visual pathway. Each model exhibits a distinct failure mode in the squares condition -- systematic under-counting (Claude), massive over-counting (ChatGPT), and template hallucination (Gemini) -- but all share the same underlying deficit: severely degraded spatial localization for non-textual visual elements.
Figures & tables
Condition
Cell Acc.
Precision
Recall
F1
Text symbols
90.6%
83.3%
83.4%
83.4%
Segmented squares
64.9%
33.6%
31.7%
32.6%
Unsegmented squares
66.9%
34.5%
25.9%
29.6%
Table 1: Claude Opus results across encoding conditions.
Model
Condition
Cell Acc.
Prec.
Recall
F1
Claude Opus
Text
90.6%
83.3%
83.4%
83.4%
Unseg. Squares
66.9%
34.5%
25.9%
29.6%
Gap
− 53.8
ChatGPT 5.2
Text
91.3%
85.8%
82.3%
84.0%
Unseg. Squares
65.9%
37.1%
41.5%
39.2%
Gap
− 44.8
Table 2: Cross-model comparison. The text-vs-squares F1 gap replicates across all three model families.
Figure 1: Black-cell F1 vs. grid density across models. Left: text condition. Right: unsegmented squares. Claude and ChatGPT maintain stable text performance across all densities; Gemini collapses above ∼ 32%. All models show poor and unstable performance in the squares condition.
Figure 2: Text-vs-squares F1 gap replicates across all three model families. The gap ranges from 34 to 54 F1 points.
Figure 3: Qualitative failure modes on Grid 10 (32% density, unsegmented squares). Blue: true positives. Red: false positives. Orange: false negatives. Each model fails differently but all exhibit severe spatial mislocalization.
Figure 4: Symbol-type ablation. Left: aggregate F1 across three grids. The gap is graded, not binary. ChatGPT’s text-in-squares degradation (51%) reveals destructive pathway interference. Right: on sparse Grid 1, text-in-squares achieves 100% F1 for Claude and Gemini—complete recovery of spatial reasoning.
Model
Condition
G1
G7
G14
Agg.
Claude Opus
Text ( .# )
∼ 95
∼ 85
∼ 75
∼ 84
Text-in-squares
100.0
65.4
82.4
79.6
Unicode squares
70.8
75.0
64.3
68.8
Filled squares
∼ 45
∼ 30
∼ 20
∼ 35
Gemini 3 Think
Text ( .# )
∼ 100
∼ 85
∼ 63
∼ 63
Text-in-squares
100.0
88.3
80.2
85.7
Table 3: Symbol-type ablation (F1, %). Three grids tested per condition: Grid 1 (10.7%), Grid 7 (24.0%), Grid 14 (40.0%). Text and filled-square baselines are from the corresponding grids in the full 15-grid evaluation.
Vision-language models (VLMs) have advanced rapidly, yet they still struggle with basic spatial reasoning. Despite strong performance on general benchmarks, modern VLMs remain brittle at understanding 2D spatial relationships such as relative position, layout, and counting. We argue that this failure is not merely a data problem, but is closely tied to dominant design choices in current VLM pipelines: reliance on CLIP-style image encoders and the flattening of images into 1D token sequences with 1D positional encoding. We present a controlled diagnostic study within the LLaVA framework to isolate how these choices affect spatial grounding. We evaluate frontier models and LLaVA variants on a suite of spatial benchmarks, comparing CLIP-based encoders against alternatives trained with denser or generative objectives, as well as variants augmented with 2D positional encoding. Our results show consistent spatial performance gaps across models, and indicate that encoder objectives and positional structure shape spatial behavior, but do not fully resolve it.
Humans often solve spatial problems by mentally simulating visual transformations. In contrast, conventional vision-language models (VLMs) reason primarily through language. We investigate whether VLMs can solve spatial problems by reasoning with both text and generated visual states. To this end, we introduce WM-VLM, which equips a pretrained VLM with a lightweight world model branch for generating intermediate visual states. Our two-stage training first teaches the model to generate the next visual state and then to use that state for reasoning. We programmatically construct spatial reasoning tasks with verifiable intermediate visual states. These tasks allow us to evaluate how well the model generates visual states and how much it relies on them to answer the question. On 2D and 3D mental rotation tasks, WM-VLM consistently outperforms the supervised fine-tuned backbone, with gains of up to 39.25 percentage points. Ablations suggest that these gains depend on the generated visual states, as removing or corrupting them sharply reduces performance. Together, these results suggest that internal world models offer a promising path toward VLMs that reason in both language and visual space.
Yuheng Zha, Yilei Wang, Qiyue Gao +5
UC San Diego · Institute of Foundation Models, MBZUAI · Carnegie Mellon University
Vision-language models (VLMs) achieve strong performance on spatial reasoning benchmarks, yet it remains unclear whether this reflects structured 3D understanding or reliance on statistical shortcuts in natural images. We introduce a representation-level analysis framework that constructs minimal contrastive pairs to measure how spatial axes are organized and disentangled within VLM embeddings. Our analysis across multiple model families reveals a consistent vertical-distance entanglement: models conflate vertical image position with distance, mirroring the perspective bias of natural photographs. This bias produces a significant accuracy gap between perspective-consistent and counter-heuristic examples, and intensifies under data scaling even as overall benchmark accuracy improves. We further show that models with similar benchmark scores can exhibit different internal representations, and that these differences predict accuracy and robustness across diverse spatial reasoning benchmarks. To isolate this bias from evaluation-set skew, we introduce SpatialTunnel, a synthetic benchmark designed to expose spatial shortcut biases by removing common correlations present in natural images. Experiments confirm that the entanglement is model-intrinsic, and that models with well-separated spatial axes exhibit greater robustness, suggesting that well-structured spatial representations lead to more reliable spatial reasoning across diverse benchmarks. Code and benchmark are available on the project page: https://cheolhong0916.github.io/whyfarlooksup.github.io/.
Cheolhong Min, Jaeyun Jung, Daeun Lee +5
Seoul National University · The Ohio State University · NVIDIA