New Evidence, Same Choice: Testing Physical Experiment Selection in Vision Language Models

Sourajit Saha; Shubhashis Roy Dipta; Nobin Sarwar; Shaswati Saha; Yuxuan Jiang; Siyuan Li; Qiheng Wang

cs.CVSep 12, 2026

New Evidence, Same Choice: Testing Physical Experiment Selection in Vision Language Models

Authors: Sourajit Saha, Shubhashis Roy Dipta, Nobin Sarwar, Shaswati Saha, Yuxuan Jiang, Siyuan Li, Qiheng Wang

Abstract

A model first sees an image from one physical measurement experiment, such as how far a block coasted, and must answer a question about a new trial, such as whether the block will pass a target after a fixed push. The initial experiment may provide enough information to answer, or the model may need another measurement, such as the object's mass, friction, restitution, or spring stiffness. We study whether vision language models can decide when to answer immediately and, when more evidence is needed, which experiment to perform. Current physical reasoning benchmarks usually evaluate only the final answer, so they do not directly measure this decision-making ability. We introduce a controlled evaluation where each problem provides one measurement image and four possible physical worlds created by combining two possible masses and two possible values of another relevant property. The model must either stop and answer or select the cheapest additional experiment that can resolve the question. We construct matched problem pairs where changing either the observed measurement or the question changes the optimal action. Since all possible worlds and experiment costs are known, we can explicitly determine the optimal choice. Across six open models and 144 physical parameter sets, direct responses repeat the same action for 95.1% to 100% of image pairs even when the correct action changes. Brief reasoning improves action switching, but the best model makes both decisions correctly for only 5.9% of image pairs. Additional analysis reveals failures in measurement interpretation, physical reasoning, and response formatting. By evaluating evidence selection separately from final answers, our benchmark reveals limitations in physical reasoning that conventional answer accuracy can overlook.

Explore similar work

May 28, 2026cs.CL

World Models in Words: Auditing Physical State-Transition Commitments in Vision-Language Models

Vision-language models (VLMs) are increasingly used to answer questions about physical scenes, yet most evaluations reduce performance to a final answer. This hides whether the model perceived the right objects, represented the right physical state, predicted a plausible transition, or merely selected the right option for the wrong reasons. We introduce \wmw, an evaluation framework for auditing the \emph{language-expressed physical commitments} of VLMs. Instead of scoring only

I,q\mapsto a

, we ask models to produce a typed trace

I,q\mapsto(s_0,Δs,s_1,a)

: an initial state, a state transition, a resulting state, and an answer. A hybrid verifier then checks schema validity, state grounding, transition consistency, and answer-trace compatibility, yielding typed error labels such as object, relation, force, transition, temporal, unit/scale, and faithfulness errors. We release \tracebank, a controlled trace resource with \nSeed schema- and recomputation-validated synthetic scenarios across \nFamilies physics families, \nPairs minimally perturbed contrastive preference pairs, verifier code, audit guidelines, and model outputs. We evaluate \nModels VLMs on both controlled and external physical-reasoning examples. \wmw reveals failures that answer-only evaluation misses: 35% of correct answers from mid-tier models are backed by physically invalid traces. Verifier-guided reranking recovers up to 7 percentage points of trace validity without sacrificing answer accuracy, and trace-level preference tuning reduces hidden inconsistency by 41% relative. The contribution is not another final-answer physics benchmark, but a reusable protocol for measuring whether a VLM's stated physical world can be true at the same time as its answer.

Emmanuelle Bourigault

World Models Scenario Generation

Ask PDF

Apr 27, 2026cs.AI

PhysNote: Self-Knowledge Notes for Evolvable Physical Reasoning in Vision-Language Model

Vision-Language Models (VLMs) have demonstrated strong performance on textbook-style physics problems, yet they frequently fail when confronted with dynamic real-world scenarios that require temporal consistency and causal reasoning across frames. We identify two fundamental challenges underlying these failures: (1) spatio-temporal identity drift, where objects lose their physical identity across successive frames and break causal chains, and (2) volatility of inference-time insights, where a model may occasionally produce correct physical reasoning but never consolidates it for future reuse. To address these challenges, we propose PhysNote, an agentic framework that enables VLMs to externalize and refine physical knowledge through self-generated "Knowledge Notes." PhysNote stabilizes dynamic perception through spatio-temporal canonicalization, organizes self-generated insights into a hierarchical knowledge repository, and drives an iterative reasoning loop that grounds hypotheses in visual evidence before consolidating verified knowledge. Experiments on PhysBench demonstrate that PhysNote achieves 56.68% overall accuracy, a 4.96% improvement over the best multi-agent baseline, with consistent gains across all four physical reasoning domains.

Sinin Zhang, Yunfei Xie, Yuxuan Cheng +2

Large Vision Language Models Visual Reasoning Self-Awareness Inference-Time Clinical Notes

Ask PDF

Aug 5, 2026cs.CV

PhysMind: From Video to Executable Worlds for Training-Free Physical Reasoning

Reliable physical reasoning from video requires understanding how objects move, interact, and respond to interventions. Existing vision-language models (VLMs) often struggle to interpret these dynamics and reason reliably about future and counterfactual outcomes. We introduce PhysMind, a training-free agentic framework that constructs one reusable, question-agnostic executable world per video. PhysMind recovers a temporally consistent dynamic scene through object segmentation, mesh reconstruction, and 6D pose tracking, then fits analytic continuous-time dynamics and latent physical parameters without unrolling a time-stepped simulator. Given a question, it inspects, continues, or edits the world and answers from the resulting trajectories and interactions. Relative to direct chain-of-thought (CoT) reasoning with the same VLM, PhysMind improves accuracy by 38.23 points on CLEVRER and 8.08 points on Physion++. On counterfactual questions, it exceeds the strongest evaluated VLM baseline, GPT-5.5, by 19.25 points.

Chen Yang, Shenxiang Zeng, Haoyang Zhao +6

Agentic Video Generation Video World Models Visual Reasoning Brain

Ask PDF