VELD-QA: A Large-Scale Dataset for Visual Evidence Grounding and Question Answering in Long Documents

Answer grounding in document visual question answering remains an open challenge: most benchmarks lack grounding annotations or provide limited-quality labels, while constructing grounded datasets still requires costly manual effort. We introduce DocAttriBench (DAB), a large-scale benchmark for fine-grained, element-level source attribution in Document VQA, grounding answers to specific layout elements such as text blocks, tables, and images. To build DAB, we propose a Mask-based Perplexity-Derived Attribution method (MAPPET) that combines document layout and language modeling to identify the most informative element for each answer. MAPPET measures the increase in perplexity after masking candidate elements and attributes the answer to the element contributing most to model confidence. Applying MAPPET to multiple existing Document VQA datasets yields DAB, with 237k documents and 296k question-answer pairs with element-level grounding. We benchmark grounding-capable multimodal LLMs on DAB, evaluating answer accuracy, attribution accuracy, and overall answer quality. Results show that while larger models generally achieve higher answer accuracy, even the strongest models often fail to localize the supporting elements. DAB provides a scalable benchmark for developing grounded, verifiable, and trustworthy Document VQA models. Dataset and code are available at https://aimagelab.github.io/DocAttriBench/.

Real-world documents combine text with tables, charts, photographs, and diagrams arranged in diverse layouts, yet existing research on multimodal large language models (MLLMs) for document QA predominantly produces text-only responses, underutilizing these visual elements. We introduce VinQA, a dataset for long-form answer generation where cited visual elements are explicitly interleaved with their supporting text and grounded in relevant document pages. To support this task, we study two encoding methods for feeding raw document page images into an MLLM, along with their visual-element citation mechanisms: (1) Page Encoding, which directly encodes full-page images with bounding boxes of visual elements and treats these boxed regions as citable units; and (2) Modality Encoding, which parses each page to extract text and crop visual elements, encodes them separately, and uses these cropped elements as citable units. In our experiments, we propose M-GroSE, a multimodal evaluation framework extending GroUSE to assess answers along four dimensions: completeness, answer relevancy, faithfulness, and unanswerability. We additionally report Visual Source F1 to directly measure visual citation accuracy. Although proprietary frontier models still achieve the best overall scores on the VinQA test split, fine-tuning open Qwen2.5-VL models on the training split substantially improves their performance and narrows this gap. Modality Encoding is initially more robust for complex documents with long text, many visual elements, and diverse citation requirements. After training on VinQA, however, Page Encoding reaches a comparable level, competing effectively even without the explicit parsing used in Modality Encoding. Finally, Visual G-Eval, an MLLM-based judge, confirms that fine-tuned models insert visual elements at semantically appropriate positions with faithful supporting text.

Evaluating whether Multimodal Large Language Models can produce trustworthy, verifiable reasoning over long, visually rich documents requires evaluation beyond end-to-end answer accuracy. We introduce DocScope, a benchmark that formulates long-document QA as a structured reasoning trajectory prediction problem: given a complete PDF document and a question, the model outputs evidence pages, supporting evidence regions, relevant factual statements, and a final answer. We design a four-stage evaluation protocol -- Page Localization, Region Grounding, Fact Extraction, and Answer Verification -- that audits each level of the trajectory independently through inter-stage decoupling, with all judges selected and calibrated via human alignment studies. DocScope comprises 1,124 questions derived from 273 documents, with all hierarchical evidence annotations completed by human annotators. We benchmark 6 proprietary models, 12 open-weight models, and several domain-specific systems. Our experiments reveal that answer accuracy cannot substitute for trajectory-level evaluation: even among correct answers, the highest observed rate of complete evidence chains is only 29%. Across all models, region grounding remains the weakest trajectory stage. Furthermore, the primary difficulty stems from aggregating evidence dispersed across long distances and multiple document clusters, while an oracle study identifies faithful perception and fact extraction as the dominant capability bottleneck. Cross-architecture comparisons further suggest that activated parameter count matters more than total scale. The benchmark and code will be publicly released at https://github.com/MiliLab/DocScope.