MinhwaNet: Faithful but Insufficient Object Grounding in Korean Folk Painting

Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) describe artworks with remarkable fluency, yet the visual reasoning behind their outputs remains opaque. When an MLLM names a style, identifies a subject, or recognizes an iconographic symbol, does it ground each claim in the relevant region of the canvas, draw on an undifferentiated visual signal, or rely primarily on textual priors? We study this using the Token Activation Map (TAM), which produces, for each generated token, a heatmap isolating the visual evidence specific to that token from prior-context interference. Applying TAM to a curated set of paintings spanning multiple periods and genres, we analyze grounding patterns across five semantically distinct token categories: common visual objects, style descriptors, metadata, iconographic tokens, and affective expressions. We find that visual grounding varies substantially with token semantics. We further show that MLLMs attempt to identify artworks and artists, achieving higher accuracy in artist attribution than in title prediction, where hallucinations are more frequent. Finally, we compare TAM with SAM~3 open-vocabulary segmentation. To ensure reproducibility, we release our code, experimental configurations, prompts, and qualitative results on the project page at https://nicolafan.github.io/tamart/.

Appreciating multi-figure paintings requires understanding how characters relate through subtle cues like gaze alignment, gesture, and spatial arrangement. We present MIRAGE, an evidence-centric framework designed to scaffold the exploration of these "micro-interactions" in multi-figure artworks. While such cues are essential for deep narrative appreciation, they are often distributed across complex scenes and difficult for viewers to systematically identify. Existing vision-language models (VLMs) frequently fail to provide reliable assistance, offering ungrounded interpretations that lack traceable visual evidence. MIRAGE addresses this by constructing a structured intermediate representation capturing identities, pose cues, and gaze hypotheses. However, the challenge extends beyond extracting these cues to coordinating them during interpretation. Without an explicit mechanism to organize and reconcile relational evidence, models often collapse multiple interaction hypotheses into a single unstable or weakly grounded narrative, even when low-level signals are available. This representation allows users to verify how high-level interpretations are anchored in low-level visual facts. By separating spatial grounding from narrative generation, MIRAGE enables users to inspect and reason about figure-to-figure relationships through a verifiable evidence layer. We evaluate MIRAGE against painting-only VLM baselines using a blind assessment protocol. Results show that MIRAGE significantly improves identity consistency, reduces relational hallucinations, and increases the coverage of subtle interactions. These findings suggest that structured grounding can serve as a critical interaction control layer, providing the necessary scaffolding for a more reliable, transparent, and human-led understanding of complex visual narratives.

Recent vision-language models demonstrate impressive general visual understanding, yet their art interpretation remains shallow: they describe surface content but struggle with formal analysis, grounded historical interpretation, or affective characterization. We argue this is not only a model but also a dataset limitation. Existing art datasets are single perspective resources, where no dataset provides narrative, formal, emotional, and historical perspectives simultaneously for the same artworks. We introduce MMArt, a large-scale dataset of 74,234 WikiArt paintings, each annotated with four independently annotated perspectives plus a harmonized unified caption, produced by specialized vision-language models or human annotation and validated through complementary quality evaluations. Two complementarity analyses establish that perspectives encode genuinely distinct information. A generative analysis shows that formal analysis descriptions best preserve compositional style, and historical descriptions carry strong affective signal in reconstructed images. A discriminative retrieval analysis reveals task-asymmetry: narrative descriptions drive retrieval (R@1 = 44.0%), while formal descriptions, strongest for reconstruction, are nearly nondiscriminative at retrieval scale (R@1 = 7.8%). Leave-one-out analysis further confirms that historical descriptions are the least replaceable perspective across both tasks. Together, the two analyses establish that no single perspective suffices for all tasks, directly motivating MMArt multi-perspective design. The dataset, code, and additional information are available at https://shuaiwang97.github.io/MMArt/.