Does Gradient Conflict Predict the Understanding--Generation Trade-off? A Controlled Audit of Conflict-Metric Validity in Unified Multimodal Models

Unified multimodal models (UMMs) train image understanding and autoregressive image generation on shared parameters, and the two objectives are known to interfere. Existing diagnoses and remedies operate at the resolution of layers or experts, measuring conflict per layer and resolving it by separating parameters. We argue that this resolution hides an orthogonal axis. Generation in a UMM is next-token prediction over a raster sequence of visual tokens whose roles vary systematically with position, so how strongly a generation gradient interferes with understanding should depend on where in the sequence it originates. We introduce a position-resolved interference map that attributes understanding-generation gradient conflict to visual-token positions within every layer, computed from a single backward pass at $1.2\times$ the cost of a standard backward pass. On Show-o and Janus-Pro, position explains a large share of conflict variance after controlling for depth (partial $η^2=0.31$ vs. $0.35$ for layer on Show-o; $0.15$ vs. $0.30$ on Janus-Pro): the first quarter of the sequence has a mean gradient cosine of $-0.18$ against understanding, the last quarter $-0.02$. The dependence survives per-position gradient-norm normalization, retaining $80$ of its effect size, and conflict strength tracks semantic content (Spearman $ρ=0.64$). Building on the map, we propose position-aware modulation (PAM), which removes the anti-aligned component of generation gradients only at high-conflict positions without changing the architecture. Under a matched trainable-parameter budget, PAM improves over layer-wise separation by $+21$ MME and $+2.4$ GenEval points on Show-o while matching it on POPE and overall FID; a random-position control recovers about $31$ of the gain. Position-based and layer-based separation are complementary degrees of freedom and can be combined.

While unified multimodal models (UMMs) jointly perform visual understanding and generation within a single model, functional unification does not guarantee learning synergy: the two objectives may reinforce each other, compete for capacity, or merely coexist. We investigate their relationship at the representation, task, and system levels in a controlled, structurally native setting without pretrained vision priors. At the representation level, we find that each objective provides useful signal to the other: generation enriches the visual features learned for understanding, while understanding strengthens vision--language alignment for generation. However, when both objectives are forced through the same computation path, one tends to dominate. A task-decoupled architecture that specializes conflicting visual computation while preserving semantic interaction avoids this asymmetric degradation. At the task level, through three case studies, we find positive bidirectional transfer when understanding and generation tasks rely on shared knowledge. At the system level, we show that an end-to-end UMM outperforms a matched planner--executor pipeline on complex tasks that explicitly require both image understanding and generation. Together, these results show that the value of UMMs extends beyond a unified interface: appropriate specialization, shared task knowledge, and end-to-end optimization can turn coexistence into synergy.

Unified multimodal models capable of both understanding and generation have achieved remarkable strides. However, despite their unified designs, existing evaluations typically assess understanding and generation capabilities in isolation, overlooking the synergy between comprehension and generation. To bridge this gap, we introduce Unison, a comprehensive benchmark comprising 2,169 high-quality unified task samples, designed to evaluate joint understanding and generation in unified multimodal models. Unison offers three key strengths: 1) Comprehensive Dimensions: Unison encompasses internal consistency, understanding-guided generation, generation-guided understanding, and mutual enhancement to enable holistic evaluation. 2) Diagnostic Evaluation: it provides both unified and decoupled tracks for understanding and generation, allowing fine-grained attribution of failure modes and quantitative analysis of the gains from unified modeling. 3) Human Alignment: we also introduce Unison-Judge, an evaluation model well aligned with human judgments to ensure reliable assessment. Based on systematic evaluations of state-of-the-art models on Unison, we uncover critical limitations in current unified multimodal systems and highlight promising directions for future research. Codes, Unison and Unison-Judge are publicly available at https://github.com/FudanCVL/Unison.