Senses Wide Shut: A Representation-Action Gap in Omnimodal LLMs

Joint audio-visual reasoning is essential for omnimodal understanding, yet current multimodal large language models (MLLMs) still struggle when reasoning requires fine-grained evidence from both modalities. A central limitation is that explicit text-based chain-of-thought (CoT) compresses continuous audio-visual signals into discrete tokens, weakening temporal grounding and shifting intermediate reasoning toward language priors. We argue that a unified latent space is a better medium for such reasoning because it preserves dense sensory information while remaining compatible with autoregressive generation. Based on this insight, we propose \textbf{LatentOmni}, a cross-modal reasoning framework that interleaves textual reasoning with audio-visual latent states. LatentOmni introduces feature-level supervision to align latent reasoning states with task-relevant sensory features and uses Omni-Sync Position Embedding (OSPE) to maintain temporal consistency between latent audio and visual states. We further construct \textbf{LatentOmni-Instruct-35K}, a dataset of audio-visual interleaved reasoning trajectories for supervising latent-space reasoning. Comprehensive evaluation across multiple audio-visual reasoning benchmarks demonstrates that LatentOmni achieves the best performance among the evaluated open-source models and consistently outperforms the Explicit Text CoT baseline, supporting latent-space joint reasoning as a promising path toward stronger omnimodal understanding.

While multimodal large language models have advanced across text, image, and audio, personalization research has remained primarily vision-language, with unified omnimodal benchmarking that jointly covers text, image, and audio still limited, and lacking the methodological rigor to account for absent-persona scenarios or systematic grounding studies. We introduce Omni-Persona, the first comprehensive benchmark for omnimodal personalization. We formalize the task as cross-modal routing over the \emph{Persona Modality Graph}, encompassing 4 task groups and 18 fine-grained tasks across ${\sim}750$ items. To rigorously diagnose grounding behavior, we propose \emph{Calibrated Accuracy ($\mathrm{Cal}$)}, which jointly rewards correct grounding and appropriate abstention, incorporating absent-persona queries within a unified evaluation framework. On our dedicated experiments, three diagnostic findings emerge: (i) open-source models show a consistent audio-vs-visual grounding gap that RLVR partially narrows via dense rule-based supervision; (ii) answerable recall and parameter scale are incomplete diagnostics, since strong recall can coexist with absent-persona hallucination and larger models do not always achieve higher $\mathrm{Cal}$, exposing calibration as a separate evaluation axis; and (iii) SFT is bounded by the difficulty of constructing annotated ground-truth supervision at scale, while RLVR generalizes more consistently through outcome-level verifiable feedback yet drifts toward conservative behavior and lower generation quality under our reward design. Omni-Persona thus serves as a diagnostic framework that surfaces the pitfalls of omnimodal personalization, guiding future post-training and reward design.

Current Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) can process diverse sensory inputs, yet their reasoning remains heavily biased toward a dominant modality, resulting in brittle cross-modal reasoning. We introduce C$^3$PO, a benchmark of 3,404 samples spanning video, audio, image, and text, evaluating two abilities: information composition (fusing dispersed evidence) and counterfactual conflict (resolving deliberate contradictions). C$^3$PO's paired IC/CC structure and four-tier design enable targeted diagnosis of when and why cross-modal reasoning fails. Built through a fully automatic pipeline using 25 logically grounded templates, C$^3$PO reveals that while humans achieve 88.64% accuracy, the best model (Gemini-3.1-Pro) reaches only 73.17%, with open-source models collapsing under conflict. Through attention probes, we find 86-95% of failures stem from modality dominance: models commit to one modality while ignoring contradictory evidence, concentrating 87-95% of attention on text. Mid-layer attention entropy predicts correctness-sustained exploration succeeds, premature collapse fails. The 56-point accuracy gap between equally complex templates reveals that performance depends on modalities' structural roles in conflict resolution, not combinations. These findings show multimodal perception does not guarantee robust reasoning; architectures must enable sustained cross-modal attention to avoid premature