cs.CLJun 7, 2026

When Correct Decisions Hide Internal Stress: Decision-State Probing in Multimodal Language Models

Authors: Haoran ZhaoSoyeon Caren HanEduard Hovy

Organizations: 1The University of Melbourne

Abstract

Multimodal language models are typically evaluated through external behavior: selecting the correct image--text match, rejecting unsupported captions, or answering visual queries correctly. However, correct behavior alone does not show that the model's internal decision state remains stable under controlled semantic stress. We study this gap through S3^3E (Structured Semantic Stress Evaluation), a framework for analyzing behavior-internal decoupling in multimodal language models. S3^3E uses a positive-anchored A/B forced-choice setup in which an image-supported caption is contrasted against semantic stress candidates under both original and swapped option orders, while hidden states are extracted at the pre-answer decision state. We focus on strict-correct trials, where the model consistently selects the correct caption across both orders. Rather than treating arbitrary hidden-state variation as evidence of instability, we measure whether semantic-conflict candidates induce excess decision-state displacement relative to meaning-preserving controls. Across Qwen3VL, Gemma3, and InternVL3, semantic stress consistently produces positive selected-layer excess displacement over lexical controls despite correct forced-choice behavior, while comparisons against random negatives are model-dependent. We interpret this as a scoped decision-state stress-sensitivity signal rather than evidence of downstream failure or hallucination. Our results suggest that forced-choice correctness alone is not a sufficient certificate of invariant internal decision geometry.

Explore similar work

Aug 5, 2026cs.AI

C^3PO: Evaluating Cross-Modal Composition and Counterfactual Performance in Omnimodal Models

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 C3^3PO, 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). C3^3PO'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, C3^3PO 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
Swapnanil Mukherjee, Agyeya Negi, Tanuja Ganu +1
May 31, 2026cs.AI

The Shape of Wisdom: Decision Trajectories in Language Models

Language models do not simply choose an answer at the output layer. In a 9,000-trajectory MMLU study across Qwen2.5-7B-Instruct, Llama-3.1-8B-Instruct, and Mistral-7B-Instruct-v0.3, the score of the answer moves across depth in structured ways. We describe each trajectory with three quantities: the current answer margin, the next-layer change in that margin, and the distance from a decision flip. The main empirical picture is that correctness and stability are different: the largest group is unstable-correct, not stable-correct. A traced subset then asks what moves the margin. In stable-correct cases, the average attention scalar points in the correct direction, while the average MLP scalar does not; span deletion shows that removing answer-supporting text hurts the margin and removing distractor-like text helps it. The result is not a full circuit explanation. It is a reproducible way to see which answers are settled, which remain fragile, and which measured sources move them.
Shailesh Rana
Feb 11, 2026cs.CV

Stress Tests REVEAL Fragile Temporal and Visual Grounding in Video-Language Models

Video-Language Models (VidLMs) achieve strong benchmark scores, yet these scores often hide whether models use the video at all. We show that VidLM failures follow two pathways: some visual signals are never reliably encoded, while others are encoded but overridden by model priors. We introduce REVEAL, a diagnostic stress-test benchmark for quantifying when and why VidLMs under-use visual evidence. REVEAL contains five controlled probes: camera-motion sensitivity, cross-frame integration, video sycophancy, language-only shortcuts, and temporal expectation bias. Together, they test whether models encode basic video signals, combine evidence across frames, and preserve visual evidence against user assertions, language cues, and learned event expectations. Across 12 VidLMs we find systematic failures along both pathways, with most models falling below chance on the binary and six-way probes that humans solve at 78--100% accuracy. Under assertive prompts, a model's output distribution becomes nearly invariant to whether it is shown a real video or random noise, making visual evidence effectively causally inert. We further carry out mechanistic probes to identify where these failures arise in the model pipeline and why visual evidence is lost. REVEAL provides a scalable, human-verified framework for moving beyond aggregate scores toward structured, reproducible evaluation of multimodal reliability.
Sethuraman T, Savya Khosla, Aditi Tiwari +12