Evaluating Social Reasoning in Embodied Vision-Language Models
Authors: Daniel Weiner, Raj Korpan
Organizations: The Graduate Center, City University of New York (CUNY), New York, NY, USA · Hunter College and The Graduate Center, City University of New York (CUNY), New York, NY, USA
Foundation models now serve as reasoning layers for robot teams, but it remains unclear whether embodiment-specialized vision-language models (VLMs) preserve the social-reasoning capabilities of general-purpose VLMs. We evaluate Gemini Robotics-ER on SHREC, a benchmark of real human-robot social interactions, and compare it with published general-purpose VLM baselines. Robotics-ER outperforms GPT-4o-mini on error/competence detection but performs worse on detailed social-attribute judgments; adding a visual frame helps one task while hurting the other. These results suggest embodiment-specialized models may perform differently on social judgments that can be read more directly from observable interaction cues versus those requiring more inference about a person's internal state. Because the comparison spans model families, these differences cannot be attributed to embodiment specialization alone. This matters for multi-robot systems, where a shared foundation model could cause systematic social-perception errors to influence multiple coordination decisions. This work presents an initial evaluation, with broader cross-context and video-based analyses left for future work.
Figures & tables
Model
Condition
Detection
Attribute ID
GPT-4o-mini
T
0.26±0.02
0.41±0.04
GPT-4o-mini
T+V
0.20±0.03
0.42±0.02
Gemini Robotics-ER
T
0.296
0.382
Gemini Robotics-ER
T+F
0.311
0.342
TABLE I: SHREC task accuracy. GPT-4o-mini values are published SHREC baselines; Gemini Robotics-ER values are from our evaluation. Attribute identification uses SHREC’s partial-match metric.
Example
Gold (majority)
T
T+F
T+V
P50.
Comp. (3 err, 18 comp)
Comp.
Comp.
Comp.
P54
Comp. (3 err, 14 comp)
Error
Error
Error
P57
Tie (3 err, 3 comp)
None
None
Comp.
P60
Comp. (0 err, 1 comp)
Comp.
Comp.
Error
P80
Tie (17 err, 17 comp)
Error
Comp.
Comp.(R)
TABLE II: Exploratory modality probe on five wellness-home examples. Highlighted cells indicate a prediction change across input conditions; (R) denotes a change in stated reasoning without a change in predicted label. Gold labels summarize the majority label across the interaction.
Robots operating in shared human environments must not only navigate, interact, and detect their surroundings, they must also interpret and respond to dynamic, and often unpredictable, human behaviours. Although recent advances have shown promise in enhancing robotic perception and instruction-following using Vision-Language Models (VLMs), they remain limited in addressing the complexities of multimodal human-robot interactions (HRI). Motivated by this challenge, we introduce a lightweight language-to-vision feedback module that closes the loop between an LLM and the vision encoder in VLMs. The module projects image-token hidden states through a gated Multi-Layer Perceptron (MLP) back into the encoder input, prompting a second pass that reinterprets the scene under text context. We evaluate this approach on three robotics-centred tasks: navigation in a simulated environment (Habitat), sequential scene description (Mementos-Robotics), and human-intention recognition (our HRI dataset). Results show that our method improves Qwen 2.5 (7B) by 3.3% (less distance), +0.057 description score, and +2.93% accuracy, with less than 3% extra parameters; Gemma 3 (4B) and LLaVA OV 1.5 (4B) show mixed navigation results but gains +0.111,+0.055 and +10.81%,+4.79% on the latter two tasks. Code is available at https://github.com/alessioGalatolo/VLM-Reasoning-for-Robotics
Alessio Galatolo, Ronald Cumbal, Alexandros Rouchitsas +3
Department of Information Technology, Uppsala University, Sweden.
Anticipating whether a person will interact from one's own perspective is a highly intuitive task for humans, that relies on a combination of cues. We investigate how humans perform at predicting a person's intention to interact from a service robot's point of view, using pose-only or full video input, then benchmark different lightweight pose-based models and state-of-the-art vision-language models. We conducted our benchmark on the HUI360 dataset on a fixed pilot subset of 100 test tracks (25 positive, 75 negative). We found that with pose-only input, human annotators outperform lightweight trained pose models but not by large margins (+0.08 in F1-Score). But when given full egocentric video with a target bounding box, human annotators perform substantially better and largely outperform the Vision-Language Models (+0.2 in F1-Score). We also compared VLMs of different size and under different input conditions, and found that the best results do not correlate with model size. Our result confirms that predicting interactions is a challenging task for social robots and that reasoning-capable models are necessary but their actual reasoning capabilities alone do not suffice to match the social intuition of humans.
Vision-Language-Action (VLA) systems, built on pretrained vision-language models (VLMs), have shown rapidly improving performance on robot manipulation benchmarks. These gains are commonly interpreted as evidence that semantic representations learned from internet-scale data transfer to physical execution generalization. This position paper argues that the assumption underlying this interpretation -- that semantic generalization is sufficient to support physical action decisions -- has not been independently verified and cannot be tested under current evaluation protocols. We support this claim by decomposing VLA policies into semantic mapping and physical action decision, and showing that task success rate -- the dominant evaluation metric -- cannot distinguish between these two sources of capability. As a result, improvements in benchmark performance are consistent with multiple competing explanations, including semantic matching, distributional overlap, and genuine physical generalization. We further argue that this identifiability gap has been reinforced through narrative drift, whereby successive systems inherit and strengthen prior interpretations of performance gains without isolating the underlying causal mechanism. To address this limitation, we propose a research direction based on evaluation designs that introduce controlled variation to separately measure semantic and physical generalization. Such designs make it possible to causally attribute performance without requiring access to model internals, and to empirically assess the role of VLM backbones as semantic interfaces rather than implicit sources of physical competence. Our goal is not to refute the role of VLMs in robotics, but to clarify the conditions under which claims of physical generalization can be meaningfully evaluated.
Taozhao Chen, Ian Manchester, Huaming Chen
School of Electrical and Computer Engineering The University of Sydney Sydney, NSW, Australia · School of Aerospace, Mechanical and Mechatronic Engineering The University of Sydney Sydney, NSW, Australia