cs.CVJun 2, 2026

GridVQA-X: A Framework for Evaluating Multimodal Explainability Methods

Authors: Sujay BelsareSudarshan NikhilSushant KumarPonnurangam KumaraguruChirag Agarwal

Organizations: 1IIIT Hyderabad, India · University of Virginia, USA

Abstract

With the increasing development of Vision-Language Models, it becomes imperative that their predictions are readily explainable to relevant stakeholders. However, the field of explainability has not kept pace with the multimodal surge. While recent Multimodal Explainable AI (MxAI) methods generate explanations to attribute the interaction between different modalities, current evaluation protocols lack the ground truth required to distinguish between true cross-modal reasoning (e.g., spatial composition) and shallow cross-modal shortcuts (e.g., Bag-of-Words attribute matching). It remains unknown whether MxAI methods faithfully capture synergistic interactions or merely hallucinate reasoning on models acting as simple feature detectors. In this paper, we introduce GridVQA-X, the first diagnostic framework specifically designed to evaluate cross-modal explainability. Unlike natural datasets, GridVQA-X leverages a closed-world synthesis logic to generate unique, mathematically guaranteed explanations. We utilize this controlled environment to train paired ground-truth models on identical architectures: MpureM_{\text{pure}}, which learns robust spatial-relational reasoning and MspurM_{\text{spur}}, which is structurally forced to rely on cross-modal shortcuts. This behavioral divergence creates a rigorous testbed: a faithful explainer must report distinct reasoning pathways for each model. Our findings reveal that widely used methods fail to distinguish between models relying on genuine spatial-relational reasoning and those exploiting cross-modal shortcuts, highlighting a critical gap in capturing true cross-modal synergy and misrepresenting how multimodal models actually make decisions.

Explore similar work

May 21, 2026cs.AI

Measuring Cross-Modal Synergy: A Benchmark for VLM Explainability

Vision-Language Models (VLMs) map complex visual inputs to semantic spaces, but interpreting the cross-modal reasoning of VLMs currently relies on post-hoc explainers evaluated via unimodal perturbation metrics. We expose a limitation in this paradigm: because multimodal datasets contain language priors and modality biases, VLMs frequently exhibit cross-modal redundancy, allowing them to answer visual queries using text alone. Consequently, unimodal metrics penalize faithful explainers, triggering an evaluation collapse where visual and textual rankings fundamentally contradict each other. %(Kendall's τ=0.06τ= -0.06). To resolve this, we introduce Synergistic Faithfulness (Fsyn\mathcal{F}_{syn}), a scalable metric rooted in the Shapley Interaction Index that strictly isolates the joint Harsanyi dividend between modalities, serving as a highly accurate surrogate (ρ=0.92ρ= 0.92) while achieving a 24×24\times computational speedup. Evaluating 8 distinct XAI methods across 3 VLM architectures and 3 benchmark datasets, reveals that explainers proposed for VLMs heavily over-index on visual salience and significantly underperform adapted attention-based methods in capturing true cross-modal synergy. By decoupling visual plausibility from cross-modal faithfulness, this work provides a rigorous evaluation framework required to safely audit VLM reasoning in high-stakes deployments.
Joël Roman Ky, Salah Ghamizi, Maxime Cordy
Mar 4, 2026cs.LG

Feature-level Interaction Explanations in Multimodal Transformers

Multimodal Transformers often produce predictions without clarifying how different modalities jointly support a decision. Most existing multimodal explainable AI (MXAI) methods extend unimodal saliency to multimodal backbones, highlighting important tokens or patches within each modality, but they rarely pinpoint which cross-modal feature pairs provide complementary evidence (synergy) or serve as reliable backups (redundancy). We present Feature-level I2MoE (FL-I2MoE), a structured Mixture-of-Experts layer that operates directly on token/patch sequences from frozen pretrained encoders and explicitly separates unique, synergistic, and redundant evidence at the feature level. We further develop an expert-wise explanation pipeline that combines attribution with top-K% masking to assess faithfulness, and we introduce Monte Carlo interaction probes to quantify pairwise behavior: the Shapley Interaction Index (SII) to score synergistic pairs and a redundancy-gap score to capture substitutable (redundant) pairs. Across three benchmarks (MMIMDb, ENRICO, and MMHS150K), FL-I2MoE yields more interactionspecific and concentrated importance patterns than a dense Transformer with the same encoders. Finally, pair-level masking shows that removing pairs ranked by SII or redundancy-gap degrades performance more than masking randomly chosen pairs under the same budget, supporting that the identified interactions are causally relevant. Code is available at https://github.com/dut0817/FL-I2MoE.
Yeji Kim, Housam Khalifa Bashier Babiker, Mi-Young Kim +1
Jul 29, 2026cs.CV

Which Modality Decides? Counterfactual Modality Attribution for Multimodal LLMs

Multimodal large language models (MLLMs) increasingly support high-stakes decision making by combining complementary information from images and text. While existing explainability methods identify influential image regions or text tokens, they cannot answer a fundamental question: which modality drives a prediction? Consequently, a model may produce the correct output while relying on the wrong source of evidence, masking shortcut learning and unsafe reasoning. We formulate modality attribution as a complementary explainability objective for multimodal foundation models and propose Counterfactual Modality Attribution (CMA), the first framework for quantifying modality-level contributions in MLLMs. CMA generates image-only, text-only, and joint multimodal counterfactuals using coupled diffusion priors and converts them into principled modality attribution scores through a cooperative game-theoretic formulation based on Shapley values. We evaluate CMA on controlled synthetic benchmarks with known ground-truth modality reliance and on a real-world multimodal clinical dataset. CMA correctly identifies the decision-driving modality in 98% of controlled cases and consistently outperforms baselines, revealing failures of cross-modal reasoning that remain invisible to predictive accuracy alone. Our results establish modality attribution as a complementary dimension of explainability beyond feature attribution, providing a principled framework for auditing multimodal foundation models in safety-critical applications.
Vahidin Hasic, Chao Wang, Luis C. Garcia-Peraza-Herrera +2