For trained operators, gauge reading requires little specialized knowledge, low cognitive effort, and high repeatability. Yet Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) remain unreliable in continuous-valued measurement despite strong results on general multimodal benchmarks. Existing benchmarks expose this weakness but isolate measurement from realistic, knowledge-grounded settings, with limited situated context, specialized instruments, real-world noise, and matched diagnostic annotations, reducing realism and constraining root-cause analysis. We introduce InSituMeasure to evaluate situated measurement grounding. It contains 2,922 real industrial monitoring scenes across eight functional categories of professional engineering instruments, with dense gauge-attribute annotations and noise tags for failure diagnosis. We define metrics for numerical accuracy under predefined tolerances and unit consistency, rejection of fake or unanswerable tasks, and alignment between model failures and annotated error factors. Across 24 state-of-the-art MLLMs, the best model reaches only 25.7% joint value-unit accuracy and 51.8% confidence-diagnosis F1, revealing a substantial gap between general multimodal competence and reliable situated measurement. Further analysis identifies failures from text-induced shortcuts, overconfident responses, and authentic industrial noise, including mixed disturbances, viewpoint deviation, occlusion, and environmental interference.
The digital transformation of industrial manufacturing increasingly relies on the ability of autonomous robots to interact with legacy infrastructure, particularly analog gauges. While Vision-Language Models (VLMs) have demonstrated potential in zero-shot instrument recognition, their deployment in measurement systems remains constrained by an inherent inability to accurately analyze high-frequency temporal events and needle vibrations. This paper evaluates state-of-the-art models, including GPT-5 and Gemini 3, against the strict requirements of metrology and uncertainty quantification. To facilitate this evaluation, we introduce a novel dataset comprising video sequences of various gauge types: circular, linear, and Vernier, under diverse motion speed profiles. Our findings indicate that current VLMs exhibit limited ability in interpreting needle trajectories and scale semantics, failing to provide the traceability and reliability needed for safety-critical monitoring. The results demonstrate that these models have not yet achieved the performance necessary to be classified as trustworthy synthetic instruments under existing IEEE and ISO standards.
Tairan Fu, Francisco Javier Santos-Martín, Javier Conde +2
Multimodal large language models (MLLMs) have achieved impressive progress on general multimodal tasks, yet they remain brittle on dial-based measurement reading. In this paper, we study this problem through controlled benchmarks and feature-space probing, and show that current MLLMs not only achieve unsatisfactory accuracy on dial-based readout, but also suffer sharp performance drops under viewpoint and illumination changes even when the underlying dial state remains fixed. Our probing analysis further reveals that same-state samples under appearance variation are not consistently clustered, while neighboring states fail to preserve the local structure implied by continuous dial values. These findings suggest that existing MLLMs largely ignore the intrinsic state geometry of dial measurement tasks and instead rely on superficial appearance cues. Motivated by this diagnosis, we propose TriSCA, a tri-level state-consistent alignment framework for dial-based measurement reading. Specifically, TriSCA consists of state-distance-aware representation alignment, metadata-grounded observation-to-state supervision, and state-aware objective alignment. Extensive ablation studies and evaluation experiments on controlled clock and gauge benchmarks, together with evaluation on an external real-world benchmark, demonstrate the effectiveness of our method.
Multimodal large language models (LLMs) can combine topology, measurements, and incident text for grid diagnosis, yet answer accuracy does not establish that task-appropriate evidence was used. This letter proposes a general framework in order to conduct task-conditional faithfulness audit. It compares self-reported reliance, intervention-derived behavioral reliance, and preregistered engineering importance. The framework first registers task-specific evidence requirements and compares them with self-reported reliance and behavioral changes under controlled modality ablations. To resolve detected discrepancies, we design an evidence-gated correction and re-audit mechanism that regenerates failed responses under evidence constraints and independently re-ablates them to verify improved grounding without performance loss. Case studies evaluate three differently scaled LLMs on IEEE 39- and 118-bus scenarios. These results validate the framework ability to detect, diagnose, and correct task-conditional faithfulness failures.