MM-StanceDet: Retrieval-Augmented Multi-modal Multi-agent Stance Detection

Stance detection requires identifying an author's position toward a target, often from short-form texts where stance is implicit, indirect, or rhetorically framed. Although large language models (LLMs) achieve strong performance on this task, single-pass prompting can be brittle when multiple interpretations are plausible. Existing aggregation strategies, such as majority voting or self-consistency, improve robustness by combining labels, but they discard the intermediate reasoning needed to resolve conflicting interpretations. We introduce a multi-agent reasoning framework with adaptive worker allocation for stance detection that shifts aggregation from label-level voting to reasoning-level synthesis. The framework employs a Manager-Worker architecture in which a Manager adaptively allocates a variable number of Worker agents based on input complexity. Each Worker analyzes the input from a distinct perspective and produces a reasoning-only explanation without emitting a stance label; the Manager then synthesizes these explanations to produce the final prediction. We evaluate the proposed framework on SemEval-2016, P-Stance, and COVID-19 Stance using Llama, Mistral, and Gemini. Results show that the framework yields the largest gains on implicit and context-dependent stance cases, achieving 86.07 Macro-F1 on COVID-19 and 82.90 on SemEval-2016, while remaining competitive on more explicit stance datasets such as P-Stance. These findings suggest that adaptive reasoning-level aggregation is most beneficial when stance cannot be reliably inferred from surface cues alone.

Conversational stance detection has shifted from static text analysis to dynamic multimodal modeling. However, existing benchmarks exhibit three key limitations: failure to capture the dynamic evolution of beliefs, particularly during stance reversals; difficulty in disentangling affective states from logical reasoning; and neglect of the critical role of multimodal cues in resolving pragmatic ambiguities such as sarcasm. To address these limitations, we propose StanceFlip, a benchmark designed for multimodal conversational stance flipping forecasting over multi-turn dialogues across five modalities and multi-scenarios, which includes two novel subtasks: 1) Multimodal Stance Sextuple Extraction, extracting holder, target, emotion, sentiment, stance, and rationale as static state snapshots of dialogue to capture fine-grained cognitive structures. 2) Dynamic Stance Flip Attribution, tracking stance reversals across the conversation and identifying their underlying triggers. Alongside the dataset, we propose a dedicated framework, named ConStaFF, for Multimodal Conversational Stance Flipping Forecasting (MCSFF). Built upon a large language model, ConStaFF performs end-to-end stance reasoning, with a Thought-of-Stance (ToS) reasoning framework and a self-reflective verification mechanism integrated for structured stance modeling and faithful flip attribution. Specifically, ToS decomposes the reasoning process into specialized cognitive personas to formulate target propositions, resolve cross-modal conflicts, and infer historical stance trajectories. Extensive experiments show that our approach achieves state-of-the-art performance on both sextuple extraction and flip-trigger attribution, outperforming strong multimodal large language model baselines by substantial margins.

Dynamic stance classification models how a reply responds to its direct parent message, rather than how a post relates to a fixed topic. Existing work has mainly studied this problem in text-only settings, while social media interactions increasingly rely on images, screenshots, memes, reaction images, and cross-modal references. We introduce MMDS-Bench, a diagnostic benchmark for multimodal dynamic stance classification in social media parent-reply interactions. MMDS-Bench contains 3,482 multimodal instances annotated with a seven-label dynamic stance taxonomy, together with an 800-instance diagnostic subset that requires structured reasoning over parent understanding, reply understanding, and stance-relation inference. We further annotate each instance with five challenge factors covering multimodal fusion, parent framing, non-literal expression, interaction reasoning, and label-boundary ambiguity. We evaluate 12 closed-source and open-source multimodal large language models and propose a reference-grounded LLM-judge protocol for assessing reasoning quality. Results show that current MLLMs still struggle with multimodal dynamic stance understanding, especially in cases that require relational inference beyond separate parent and reply comprehension.