Perception Without Engagement: Dissecting the Causal Discovery Deficit in LMMs
Authors: Jiafeng Liang, Zhihao Zhu, Zihan Zhang, Baoqi Ren, Shixin Jiang, Runxuan Liu, Tao Ren, Ming Liu, +2 more
Organizations: Harbin Institute of Technology · Harvard University · Peking University · Pengcheng Laboratory · National University of Singapore
Abstract
Although Large Multimodal Models (LMMs) have achieved strong performance on general video understanding, their susceptibility to textual prior shortcuts during causal discovery has been recognized as a critical deficit. The underlying mechanisms of this phenomenon remain incompletely understood, as existing benchmarks only measure response accuracy without revealing the sources and extent of the deficit. We introduce ProCauEval, a perturbation-based evaluation protocol that shifts from outcome assessment to mechanism diagnosis, probing causal discovery through five controlled configurations that systematically manipulate visual and textual modalities to decompose their respective contributions to model behavior and dissect the failure modes. Evaluating 17 mainstream LMMs, we find that models faithfully perceive video content yet systematically underexploit it during causal reasoning. We further observe that stronger post-training amplifies rather than mitigates textual prior reliance, and that higher baseline performance correlates with greater fragility under perturbation. To address these, we propose Anti-Distillation Policy Optimization (ADPO), a reinforcement learning framework built on negative teacher alignment, which augments GRPO by explicitly pushing the policy away from a prior-only counterfactual teacher induced by visual corruption. Specifically, ADPO maximizes the divergence between the policy distributions conditioned on the original and visually corrupted inputs, thereby forcing the model to ground its reasoning in visual evidence rather than textual shortcuts. Extensive experiments show that ADPO improves visual engagement without sacrificing fundamental comprehension, thus offering a preliminary step toward reliable causal discovery.
Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs) have demonstrated remarkable capabilities in multimodal reasoning. However, prevailing reinforcement learning (RL) paradigms lack explicit counterfactual enhancement and causal learning mechanisms. This fundamental deficiency results in severe grounding failures, manifesting as a tendency to ignore visual evidence in favor of language priors or exhibiting hallucination drift during long chain-of-thought reasoning. To address this root cause, we propose CounterFactual Policy Optimization (CFPO), a novel framework that enforces causal consistency between visual perception and textual reasoning. CFPO introduces a cross-modal counterfactual enhancement mechanism, which regularizes the policy by maximizing the discrepancy between the model's predictions and those from a counterfactual state where critical visual cues are suppressed. This approach seamlessly integrates with standard algorithms like GRPO and DAPO without requiring external reward models or additional supervision. Extensive experiments demonstrate that CFPO significantly improves reasoning fidelity, achieving consistent gains of 3.17%-6.25% over standard RL baselines and 1.32%-2.13% over the state-of-the-art perception-aware method (PAPO). Code is available at https://github.com/Raven-July/CFPO.
Despite the impressive performance of vision-language models (VLMs) on downstream tasks, their ability to understand and reason about causal relationships in visual inputs remains unclear. Robust causal reasoning is fundamental to solving complex high-level reasoning tasks, yet existing benchmarks often include a mixture of reasoning questions, and VLMs can frequently exploit object recognition and activity identification as shortcuts to arrive at the correct answers, making it challenging to truly assess their causal reasoning abilities. To bridge this gap, we introduce VQA-Causal and VCR-Causal, two new benchmarks specifically designed to isolate and rigorously evaluate VLMs' causal reasoning abilities. Our findings reveal that while VLMs excel in object and activity recognition, they perform poorly on causal reasoning tasks, often only marginally surpassing random guessing. Further analysis suggests that this limitation stems from a severe lack of causal expressions in widely used training datasets, where causal relationships are rarely explicitly conveyed. We additionally explore fine-tuning strategies with hard negative cases, showing that targeted fine-tuning can improve model's causal reasoning while maintaining generalization and downstream performance. Our study highlights a key gap in current VLMs and lays the groundwork for future work on causal understanding.
Vision-language models (VLMs) generate fluent causal explanations, but current evaluations cannot distinguish linguistic plausibility from faithful causal reasoning. We introduce a dual-probe methodology that isolates these properties. The Text-Only Probe measures linguistic quality. The Chain-Text Probe requires models to first generate explicit causal chains. The Abstraction Gap (AG) metric quantifies the normalized performance difference. Evaluating eight VLMs on CAGE (Causal Abstraction Gap Evaluation), a benchmark of 49,500 questions across 5,500 images spanning Pearl's causal hierarchy, we find seven models exhibit AG exceeding 0.50 with text scores of 6--8 but chain scores below 2.5. Fine-tuning on 45,000 chain-annotated examples fails to close the gap. However, one model achieves near-zero AG. The capability exists within current VLM architectures and depends on pretraining and architectural choices. CAGE provides a diagnostic tool for assessing faithful causal reasoning in VLMs.