VL-Calibration: Decoupled Confidence Calibration for Large Vision-Language Models Reasoning

A calibrated Vision-Language Model (VLM) can repeatedly self-correct, say "Wait, I should recheck," arrive at the wrong answer, and still report high confidence. We find that this occurs because verbalized confidence is largely trajectory-independent in the VLMs and calibration methods we evaluate. We examine this through three complementary lenses: content variation, token masking, and the model's own hesitation markers. We show that confidence is insufficiently sensitive to what the reasoning trajectory actually contains, and that calibration training can paradoxically worsen this disconnect. Since existing metrics like ECE and AUROC cannot detect this problem, we propose the Trajectory-Grounding Score (TGS) in two complementary forms: TGS-self, which compares confidence with and without access to the model's own trajectory, and TGS-pair, which tests whether the model assigns higher confidence to correct trajectories than to flawed ones along the vision, reasoning, and answer axes. We propose TGS-Bench, a model-agnostic suite spanning 10 benchmarks with controlled good/bad trajectory pairs, and show that conventional calibration rankings diverge from trajectory-grounding rankings, exposing a blind spot in current evaluation practice.

Large Vision-Language Models (VLMs) suffer from prohibitive inference overhead due to long sequences of visual tokens. However, existing visual token reduction methods mainly improve efficiency by pruning or compressing redundant tokens without examining whether the resulting representation remains semantically consistent with the original representation. Mapping the original N-token visual sequence to K tokens may discard, dilute, or misassign critical visual cues, triggering severe semantic drift that deviates the VLM's understanding. In this paper, we first introduce the principle of 'Calibrate Before Reason' to visual token reduction and propose CaRe, a training-free robust framework that calibrates compact visual representations before reasoning to preserve semantic fidelity in VLMs. CaRe consists of two mutually complementary modules: 1) Perturbation-Robust Calibration Anchoring, which identifies calibration anchors with stable model-side influence under multi-directional perturbations; 2) Confidence-Gated Token Calibration, which extracts reliable calibration signals from unselected tokens and injects them into anchors. Extensive evaluations across diverse VLM architectures and benchmarks verify that CaRe outperforms state-of-the-art token reduction baselines. While pruning 94.4% of visual tokens, our method retains 96.4% of the original full-token performance, delivering up to 2.30 times faster end-to-end inference speed relative to unpruned vanilla models.

Large language models (LLMs) tend to verbalize confidence scores that are largely detached from their actual accuracy, yet the geometric relationship governing this behavior remain poorly understood. In this work, we present a mechanistic interpretability analysis of verbalized confidence, using linear probes and contrastive activation addition (CAA) steering to show that calibration and verbalized confidence signals are encoded linearly but are orthogonal to one another -- a finding consistent across three open-weight models and four datasets. Interestingly, when models are prompted to simultaneously reason through a problem and verbalize a confidence score, the reasoning process disrupts the verbalized confidence direction, exacerbating miscalibration. We term this the "Reasoning Contamination Effect." Leveraging this insight, we introduce a two-stage adaptive steering pipeline that reads the model's internal accuracy estimate and steers verbalized output to match it, substantially improving calibration alignment across all evaluated models.