Knowledge-based visual question answering (KB-VQA) demonstrates significant potential for handling knowledge-intensive tasks. However, conflicts arise between static parametric knowledge in vision language models (VLMs) and dynamically retrieved information due to the static model knowledge from pre-training. The outputs either ignore retrieved contexts or exhibit inconsistent integration with parametric knowledge, posing substantial challenges for KB-VQA. Current knowledge conflict mitigation methods primarily adapted from language-based approaches, focusing on context-level conflicts through engineered prompting strategies or context-aware decoding mechanisms. However, these methods neglect the critical role of visual information in conflicts and suffer from redundant retrieved contexts, which impair accurate conflict identification and effective mitigation. To address these limitations, we propose CC-VQA: a novel training-free, conflict- and correlation-aware method for KB-VQA. Our method comprises two core components: (1) Vision-Centric Contextual Conflict Reasoning, which performs visual-semantic conflict analysis across internal and external knowledge contexts; and (2) Correlation-Guided Encoding and Decoding, featuring positional encoding compression for low-correlation statements and adaptive decoding using correlation-weighted conflict scoring. Extensive evaluations on E-VQA, InfoSeek, and OK-VQA benchmarks demonstrate that CC-VQA achieves state-of-the-art performance, yielding absolute accuracy improvements of 3.3% to 6.4% compared to existing methods. Code is available at https://github.com/cqu-student/CC-VQA.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Example of Knowledge Conflict in KB-VQA. The introduction of external knowledge can enhance performance in knowledge-intensive visual question answering tasks; however, it concurrently introduces error risks stemming from conflicts between model parametric knowledge and external sources. Leveraging visual semantic features from both query image and contexts (highlighted in red) may mitigate knowledge conflicts and improve response accuracy in KB-VQA tasks.
Figure 2: Similarity Statistics Between Contextual Sentences and Question.
Figure 3: Overview of CC-VQA. CC-VQA consists of two key components.(1) Visual-Centric Contextual Conflict Reasoning: CC-VQA extracts semantic visual descriptions from both parametric and external contexts, then reasons about knowledge conflicts with the summarized visual-centric information.(2) Correlation-Guided Encoding and Decoding: By computing fine-grained correlations, CC-VQA dynamically compresses low-correlation information during positional encoding and adjusts the output distribution during decoding based on these correlations.
Figure 4: Illustration of Visual-Centric Contextual Conflict Reasoning . CC-VQA explicitly extracts the model’s parametric context and the visual rationale for all contexts. Through visual rationales, CC-VQA identifies and summarizes visual-centric conflicts Rvis to address conflicting information.
E-VQA
InfoSeek
Method
Model
Gen. FT
Retriever
Single-Hop
All
Unseen-Q
Unseen-E
All
Zero-shot MLLMs
BLIP-2 [ 15 ]
Flan-T5 XL
–
–
12.6
12.4
12.7
12.3
12.5
InstructBLIP [ 7 ]
Flan-T5 XL
–
–
11.9
12.0
8.9
7.4
8.1
LLaVA-v1.5 [ 20 ]
Vicuna-7B
–
–
16.3
16.9
9.6
9.4
9.5
GPT-4V [ 1 ]
–
–
–
26.9
28.1
15.0
14.3
14.6
Table 1: VQA accuracy on E-VQA and InfoSeek. Our method is highlighted in light blue. The superscript ∗ denotes the use of the top-3 sections to intentionally induce knowledge conflict, and Gen.FT indicates whether the generation process is fine-tuned.
Figure 5: The Case of CC-VQA . Qualitative results from Encyclopedic-VQA (top row) and InfoSeek (bottom row) illustrate knowledge conflicts introduced by retrieved information and show the effective mitigation achieved by our model.
Method
Model
Gen.FT
Accuracy
Qwen2.5-VL-7B
-
-
72.4
Wiki-PRF-7B [ 10 ]
Qwen2.5-VL-7B
✔
77.8
MMKB-RAG [ 18 ]
LLaMA-3.1-8B
✗
65.4
KU-RAG [ 40 ]
LLaVA-Next-7B
✗
73.1
CC-VQA ( Ours )
Qwen2.5-VL-7B
✗
78.8
Table 2: Performance on OK-VQA.
Method
Model
Retriever
Accuracy
Qwen2.5-VL-7B
-
EVA-CLIP-8B ∗
55.3
Ours
Qwen2.5-VL-7B
EVA-CLIP-8B ∗
66.5
Table 3: Oracle Analysis. VQA Accuracy in Oracle Setting with Ground-Truth Articles.
Method
Retriever
Helpful Ratio
Harmful Ratio
Qwen2.5-VL-7B
EVA-CLIP-8B ∗
16.82
10.53
CC-VQA( Ours )
EVA-CLIP-8B ∗
18.63
7.69
Table 4: Benefits of Knowledge Conflict Mitigation.
Model
Retriever
VCCR
CAD
CPE
Accuracy
Qwen2.5-VL-7B
EVA-CLIP-8B ∗
41.4
Qwen2.5-VL-7B
EVA-CLIP-8B ∗
✔
43.3
Qwen2.5-VL-7B
EVA-CLIP-8B ∗
✔
✔
44.1
Qwen2.5-VL-7B
EVA-CLIP-8B ∗
✔
✔
✔
45.0
Table 5: Component Ablation. We perform ablation studies on the components of CC-VQA using a 10K subset of InfoSeek.
α
0.1
0.3
0.5
0.7
0.9
1.0
Accuracy
44.0
44.2
45.0
44.9
44.5
44.1
Table 6: Ablation of Alpha. We conduct ablation studies varying the encoding compression parameter ( α ) from 0.1 to 1.0 .
Figure 6: Illustration of Visual-Centric Contextual Conflict Reasoning . The figure shows how CC-VQA extracts visual-centric conflicts, with the corresponding image regions highlighted by red boxes.
Figure 7: Illustration of Correlation-Aware Positional Encoding.
Method
τ
Accuracy
25%
43.5
Qwen2.5-VL-7B
50%
44.7
75%
45.0
Table 7: Ablation of Compression Ratio τ .
Method
Model
Acc.
Vanilla RAG
Qwen3-VL-8B
47.7
CC-VQA
Qwen3-VL-8B
50.8
Table 8: Generalization across Models and Retrieval Size.
Method
Model
Inference Time (s/k)
CoCoA
Qwen2.5-VL-7B
713.3
CC-VQA (Ours)
Qwen2.5-VL-7B
616.4
Table 10: Inference Time.
Method
Total Time
Analysis
Generation
Gen. Finetuning
Acc.(%)
Wiki-PRF (SOTA)
8.77s
3.30s
5.34s
✔
42.8
CC-VQA (Ours)
8.94s
4.99s
3.95s
✘
45.1
Table 11: Comparison with Wiki-PRF.
Verifier
#Samples
Generation
Extraction
Analysis
VCCR
Human
100
96%
77%
98%
91%
MLLM-based
10,000
93.87%
82.31%
95.55%
84.79%
Table 12: Analysis of VCCR.
Figure 8: Distribution of MLLM-based Verification for VCCR.
Figure 9: Detail Case of VCCR.
Figure 10: More Cases of CC-VQA on E-VQA . Qualitative results from Encyclopedic-VQA demonstrate that our method also enhances the model’s retrieval-augmented generation capabilities.
Figure 11: More Cases of CC-VQA on Infoseek . Qualitative results from Infoseek demonstrate that our method also enhances the model’s retrieval-augmented generation capabilities.
Knowledge-based visual question answering combines image understanding with external or learned knowledge to answer questions requiring facts beyond the image.
Knowledge-Based Visual Question Answering (KB-VQA) aims to evaluate whether Visual Language Models (VLMs) can retrieve, ground, and reason over external structured knowledge beyond visual evidence. In practice, answer accuracy is widely adopted as the primary evaluation metric, implicitly treating correctness as a proxy for knowledge-grounded reasoning. However, for existing KB-VQA benchmarks, this proxy relies on critical assumptions that are often overlooked and rendered unreliable by benchmark issues: annotated answer must be derivable from the associated knowledge base, question must be well-posed with sufficient constraints, and visual setting must meaningfully require grounded disambiguation. In this work, we show that these assumptions are systematically violated in existing KB-VQA benchmarks. Our audit reveals substantial instances with missing or contradicted answers and underspecified questions that render accuracy a misleading metric. Furthermore, we find that existing datasets rely on visually trivial, single-entity scenes that bypass the need for sophisticated visual-to-knowledge mapping. We demonstrate that even with controlled architectures, these flaws lead to distorted model rankings and overestimations of reasoning capabilities. To address this, we introduce (1) a principled audit-and-repair protocol that restores answer derivability and question clarity, and (2) a controlled multi-entity augmentation protocol that introduces visual ambiguity to challenge initial retrieval and grounded reasoning. Re-evaluation under corrected and augmented settings yields markedly different performance trends. Our findings call for rethinking evaluation protocols and designing more interaction-aware KB-VQA benchmarks that prioritize verifiable reasoning over simple matching.
Qian Ma, S M Rayeed, Charles V. Stewart +2
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy NY 12047, USA · AT&T Chief Data Office, Bedminster NJ 07921, USA
Knowledge-Based Visual Question Answering (KB-VQA) relies on retrieving external information to answer queries involving long-tail entities. However, existing retrieval pipelines predominantly employ CLIP-style dual encoders, which prioritize surface-level visual similarity over entity-level semantic alignment. This paradigm often fails when semantically identical concepts exhibit large visual variations or when distinct entities appear visually similar. To address this, we propose KBMR, the first MLLM-based embedding retriever tailored for KB-VQA. Leveraging the robust autoregressive capabilities of MLLMs, KBMR maps images into a semantic space that better preserves concept identity. To tackle the challenge of noisy supervision in Wikipedia-scale retrieval, we introduce an MLLM-based semantic discriminator that generates continuous entity-consistency weights. These weights guide a novel continuous semantic distillation objective, enabling effective hard negative sampling and soft supervision beyond rigid binary labels. Extensive experiments demonstrate that KBMR significantly outperforms CLIP baselines, yielding up to a 14.7% improvement in retrieval Recall@1 and a 9.4% gain in end-to-end VQA accuracy. Code is available at https://github.com/realHarryX/KBMR.
Hangrui Xu, Zhengxian Wu, Yunyao Yu +6
Shenzhen International Graduate School, Tsinghua University Shenzhen, China · University of Arizona Tucson, USA
Knowledge-based Visual Question Answering (KB-VQA) requires models to answer questions by integrating visual information with external knowledge. However, retrieved knowledge is often noisy, partially irrelevant, or misaligned with the visual content, while internal model knowledge is difficult to control and interpret. Naive aggregation of these sources limits reasoning effectiveness and reduces answer accuracy. To address this, we propose MaS-VQA, a selection-driven framework that tightly couples explicit knowledge filtering with implicit knowledge reasoning. MaS-VQA first retrieves candidate passages and applies a Mask-and-Select mechanism to jointly prune irrelevant image regions and weakly relevant knowledge fragments, producing compact, high-signal multimodal knowledge . This filtered knowledge then guides the activation of internal knowledge in a constrained semantic space, enabling complementary co-modeling of explicit and implicit knowledge for robust answer prediction. Experiments on Encyclopedic-VQA and InfoSeek demonstrate consistent performance gains across multiple MLLM backbones, and ablations verify that the selection mechanism effectively reduces noise and enhances knowledge utilization.
Xianwei Mao, Kai Ye, Sheng Zhou +4
Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China · Alibaba Group, Hangzhou, China