SCoOP: Semantic Consistent Opinion Pooling for Uncertainty Quantification in Multiple Vision-Language Model Systems

Aggregating heterogeneous vision-language models (VLMs) can improve multimodal reasoning, but neither an individual model's confidence nor that of the aggregated answer measures reliability at the system level. We present CUSP (Collective Uncertainty through Semantic Opinion Pooling), a training-free uncertainty quantification framework that maps multiple VLM responses to a shared semantic response space, pools them into a pooled semantic opinion, and reports two complementary system-level signals: collective uncertainty, the dispersion of the pooled opinion, and Jensen-Shannon divergence (JSD), the conflict among the model-level opinions. Within this pooled semantic opinion, the unnormalized collective entropy decomposes exactly into the mean of the models' individual semantic entropies and the JSD, separating total dispersion from model conflict. Requiring neither token logits nor calibration labels, CUSP applies to open-weight and commercial VLMs alike. In static multi-VLM ensembles, collective uncertainty is the strongest signal in the small-model regime (0.764 AUROC for prediction-error detection, 0.889 AUARC for abstention), outperforming uncertainty baselines majority voting and naive selection by 4.7 to 15.8 points and widening its margin as the ensemble grows; JSD is strongest in the evaluated commercial regime (0.819 AUROC, 0.910 AUARC) and ranks hard-answer model conflict with AUROC up to 0.982. The pooled prediction also improves accuracy over the average single model by 5.6 to 13.0 points. Over the full trajectory of a multi-step, multi-agent system, subagent collective uncertainty ranks system failures above chance (0.619 AUROC) and gives the best abstention ordering among the evaluated signals (0.699 AUARC).

Large vision--language models (LVLMs) demonstrate strong multimodal reasoning capabilities but remain prone to hallucination, where model predictions are not grounded in visual evidence. Existing black-box hallucination detection methods estimate uncertainty through a single consistency metric, implicitly assuming that model uncertainty can be adequately characterized by a single measure. However, hallucinations exhibit diverse manifestations of uncertainty across different behavioral probes, making a single measure insufficient to characterize their underlying behavior. We propose Unique Hallucination Pattern (UHP) Detection, a fully black-box framework that models hallucination as a structured uncertainty pattern defined by two axes: perturbation modality (image vs.\ text) and logical polarity (a statement vs.\ its negation). Their intersection produces four complementary consistency groups that capture distinct manifestations of model uncertainty, from which both within-group and between-group features are extracted to train a lightweight classifier. Through comprehensive experiments on AMBER and PhD across three LVLMs, UHP Detection consistently outperforms prior black-box and white-box baselines, with improvements of up to $+18.72\%$ AUC-ROC and $+20.07\%$ AUC-PR over the strongest black-box methods. Extensive ablation studies demonstrate that each consistency group contributes complementary information and that their combination forms a structured hallucination pattern. Furthermore, cross-dataset evaluation shows that this learned pattern generalizes across benchmarks, indicating that hallucination behavior reflects a model-specific consistency pattern. Code is publicly available at https://github.com/amirezzati/uhpdet.

Vision-language models (VLMs) are increasingly deployed in high-stakes settings where reliable uncertainty quantification (UQ) is as important as predictive accuracy. Extended reasoning via chain-of-thought (CoT) prompting or reasoning-trained models has become ubiquitous in modern VLM pipelines, yet its effect on UQ reliability remains poorly understood. Our results show that reasoning tends to degrade the quality of many uncertainty estimates, even when it improves task accuracy. We identify implicit answer conditioning as the primary mechanism: as reasoning traces converge on a conclusion before the final answer is generated, token probabilities increasingly reflect consistency with the model's own reasoning trace rather than uncertainty about correctness. In effect, the model becomes overconfident in its answer. In contrast, agreement-based consistency remains robust and often improves under reasoning, making it a practical choice for uncertainty estimation in reasoning-enabled VLMs.