Designing Textual Interfaces To Enhance Llm Reasoning On Audio-Visual Question Answering
Authors: Yi Wang, Tianzi Wang, Tong Lei, Dahan Wang, Peter Bell
Organizations: School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh, UK · Department of Systems Engineering and Engineering Management, Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR · Key Laboratory of Modern Acoustics, Institute of Acoustics, Nanjing University, China
Automatic prompt optimization (APO) has shown strong effectiveness for text-based LLMs and LLM systems, but its application to audio-visual understanding systems requires suitable textual interfaces through which multimodal reasoning can be exposed to text-based optimizers. We investigate how the design of textual interfaces affects prompt optimization for multimodal reasoning, on the audio-visual question answering task. We compare three interface designs, including a direct inference system consisting of a single omni-modal large language model (OmniLLM), a captioner-reasoner system, and an agentic architecture in which a primary agent orchestrates subagent OmniLLMs. Experiments with Qwen3-Omni and Gemini show that direct prompt optimization provides model-dependent gains; the captioner-reasoner system and the agentic system expose more interpretable optimization interfaces but are harder to optimize, where error analysis of cases affected by optimization is conducted. Our study highlights textual interface design as an important factor in making prompt optimization effective for omni-modal reasoning systems. Our implementation details are specified in GitHub repo.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Demonstration of LLM reasoning on AVQA.
Figure 2: Overview of the three systems we investigated and compared for instruction optimization .
Model
Optimizer
Accuracy (%)
Val (125)
Overall
Test (947)
Δ Test
Qwen3-Omni Instruct
None
72.80
72.18
71.81
-
COPRO
71.20
71.93
71.59
-0.22
GEPA
75.20
72.01
71.49
-0.32
Qwen3-Omni Think
None
69.60
69.76
69.06
-
COPRO
71.20
69.26
68.85
-0.21
Table 1: Direct QA prompt optimization on Qwen3-Omni. Δ Test is relative to the corresponding unoptimized model.
Model
Optimizer
Accuracy (%)
Val (125)
Overall
Test (947)
Δ Test
Gemini 2.5-Flash
None
77.60
77.03
75.71
-
COPRO
72.80
78.11
78.25
2.54
GEPA
79.20
79.62
79.83
4.12
Table 2: Direct QA prompt optimization on Gemini-2.5-Flash.
System
Captioner
Reasoner
Optimizable Component
Accuracy (%)
Val 125
Overall
Test 947
Direct Inference system as baseline
Gemini
–
–
–
77.60
77.03
75.71
Same Caption, Reasoner Control
Captioner- Reasoner
Gemini
Gemini
None
68.00
69.17
69.27
GPT-4.1
68.00
69.50
70.01
Table 3: Effect of the captioner-reasoner interface and prompt optimization. The direct Gemini inference result is included as a reference. Gemini stands for Gemini-2.5-Flash model.
System
Optimization
Accuracy (%)
Val 125
Overall
Test 947
Gemini
None
77.60
77.03
75.71
ReAct
None
74.40
76.11
76.03
GEPA
76.80
75.77
76.03
Table 4: Effect of the agentic system and prompt optimization on the text agent workflow instruction.
Interface
Selected optimized-instruction excerpt
Main scope
Direct
“Using only what is directly seen or heard in the video …identify the single answer choice …best supported by the video evidence at the relevant moment.”
Evidence grounding and final decision
ReAct
“When reviewing the caption, carefully map each answer option to specific visual or audio events and their sequence. …identify any ambiguity …formulate a single, highly specific perceptual question …”
Caption acquisition, query formulation, etc.
Table 5: Selected excerpts from GEPA-optimized instructions for direct Gemini inference and the ReAct agent.
Improving joint audio-visual reasoning in Omni Large Language Models typically incurs substantial data construction and training costs. Our diagnostics reveal multi-hop reasoning difficulties despite correct answers to all corresponding single-hop questions and suggest partial decoupling in the local optimization of perception and reasoning objectives. This motivates post-training with different emphases on these capabilities. Text-only reasoning training yields gains across data sources, model scales, and families. With the best-performing text-only configuration, supervised fine-tuning followed by reinforcement learning (RL) raises Qwen2.5-Omni-7B's geometric mean of nine reasoning scores by 25.83% over the base model, outperforming the complete native audio-visual route with 56.6% fewer GPU-hours. Training on data synthesized entirely by a text-only LLM raises this geometric mean by 21.01% without audio-visual data in construction or training. However, text-only training degrades perception. We therefore propose a text-centric post-training paradigm: text-only training provides the main reasoning optimization, and reduced-data native audio-visual RL then refines perception. Refinement uses about 90% fewer input tokens than full-data audio-visual RL, restores perception above the base level, and retains 93.5% of the best-performing text-only pipeline's reasoning gain.
Joint audio-visual reasoning is essential for omnimodal understanding, yet current multimodal large language models (MLLMs) still struggle when reasoning requires fine-grained evidence from both modalities. A central limitation is that explicit text-based chain-of-thought (CoT) compresses continuous audio-visual signals into discrete tokens, weakening temporal grounding and shifting intermediate reasoning toward language priors. We argue that a unified latent space is a better medium for such reasoning because it preserves dense sensory information while remaining compatible with autoregressive generation. Based on this insight, we propose LatentOmni, a cross-modal reasoning framework that interleaves textual reasoning with audio-visual latent states. LatentOmni introduces feature-level supervision to align latent reasoning states with task-relevant sensory features and uses Omni-Sync Position Embedding (OSPE) to maintain temporal consistency between latent audio and visual states. We further construct LatentOmni-Instruct-35K, a dataset of audio-visual interleaved reasoning trajectories for supervising latent-space reasoning. Comprehensive evaluation across multiple audio-visual reasoning benchmarks demonstrates that LatentOmni achieves the best performance among the evaluated open-source models and consistently outperforms the Explicit Text CoT baseline, supporting latent-space joint reasoning as a promising path toward stronger omnimodal understanding.
Yifan Dai, Zhenhua Wu, Bohan Zeng +18
School of AI, Shanghai Jiao Tong University · 2Kling Team, Kuaishou Technology · 3Peking University +5
Automatic prompt optimization (APO) has been widely adopted to adapt vision-language models (VLMs) to downstream tasks without weight updates, yielding promising results. However, on multimodal tasks, the effectiveness of APO is fundamentally bottlenecked by a blind feedback channel: the optimizer reads the question, the prediction, and the gold answer, but never the input image on which the model failed, and therefore cannot diagnose visually grounded errors. As a remedy, we introduce Cross-Modal Visual Feedback (CMVF). CMVF incorporates (1) a failure-conditioned visual diagnosis stage, in which a stronger optimizer VLM inspects each failed image without access to predictions or labels, and (2) an error-aware aggregation stage that compresses these observations into reusable, task-level visual blind-spot patterns that drive the prompt rewrite. Crucially, the image is consumed only during optimization; the deployed artifact is an ordinary text prompt that runs at the same inference cost as any text-only baseline. Extensive results across 12 VQA datasets and 4 target VLMs demonstrate that CMVF consistently ranks first, improving over the strongest baseline on every target by 2.4 points on average, with gains of up to 6.5 points on individual benchmarks. Moreover, the optimizer self-organizes into expert-style visual checklists that transfer across models without re-optimization.
Haoyue Liu, Xiaoyu Ma, Ye Chen +2
The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shenzhen, China · Xi’an Jiaotong University, China · Peking University, China +1