Faithfulness in VLMs

Vision-language models increasingly reason through crops, regions, and tool-produced observations. Yet an observation can influence the answer without benefiting the candidate it supports. We study candidate-bound visual contribution: valid evidence should help, invalidating its supporting relation should remove its additional effect, and valid rebinding should redirect that effect to the newly supported candidate. We introduce CROSS-Bench, a benchmark of 28,000 decision problems, with matched invalidation and rebinding tests on a dedicated evaluation subset. Our RIVET interface preserves evidence identity and uncertainty, composes a candidate-conditioned response, and separately controls its strength. Shared-evidence experiments show that task accuracy and evidence ownership can diverge. Under matched capacity and training, RIVET increases normalized effect transfer from 0.512 to 0.651 where clean evidence has a positive effect. The advantage persists on common evaluation examples and across repeated decision-layer fits. With evidence predicted from raw inputs, RIVET improves CROSS-Bench accuracy by an average of 5.70 pp across four frozen backbones, relative to the same models without auxiliary evidence. These results separate the utility of visual evidence from the candidate-specific destination of its effect.

Thinking-enabled vision-language models (VLMs) report ever-higher accuracy on spatial benchmarks, yet final-answer scores cannot reveal whether a correct prediction reflects faithful spatial reasoning or a linguistic shortcut. We introduce SpatialChain, a dataset of 28,350 training and 899 test examples pairing spatially-oriented GQA questions with scene-graph-grounded reasoning chains, retained only when the generated answer matches the symbolic ground truth, and a two-axis evaluation combining objective chain-overlap metrics with a scene-graph-aware LLM judge that scores faithfulness and completeness independently of the final answer. Applied to nine thinking-enabled VLMs, the protocol surfaces three findings invisible to standard accuracy: (i) four of nine models achieve $\geq$79% VQA accuracy while exhibiting shortcut rates above 39%, i.e., correct answers whose reasoning the judge marks as unfaithful; (ii) chain quality significantly predicts answer correctness for seven of nine models, but the two exceptions (Claude Sonnet 4.6, InternVL3.5-8B) reveal qualitatively distinct failure modes, terse output vs. verbose-decorative reasoning, that benchmark accuracy alone conflates; (iii) SFT on SpatialChain improves Qwen3-VL-8B by +6.2 pp in-domain and reduces its shortcut rate to 22%, while a stylistic specialization effect on external benchmarks motivates replay-augmented training as mitigation. The faithfulness judge is validated against 198 human-annotated items, where judge-human agreement matches human-human agreement, and against a second judge from a different provider, which preserves the model ranking ($ρ$ = 0.88). Data, generation scripts, and evaluation code are released at https://github.com/spatialchain/SpatialChainBenchmark.

Large vision-language models (LVLMs) exhibit strong reasoning capabilities, yet the visual and textual evidence supporting the generated responses remains difficult to identify. Faithful token attribution explains an LVLM's response by assigning scores that rank image and prompt tokens by how much the model relies on them, such that removing higher-ranked tokens causes the likelihood of the generated response to drop more rapidly. However, existing token-attribution methods have been developed mainly for text-based language models, and our empirical study reveals two challenges when complex multimodal sources are involved. First, the joint image-text attribution can underrepresent visual evidence relative to text, obscuring the image regions supporting the response. Second, visual evidence may influence the generated response through multiple intermediate reasoning paths, while existing methods trace only a limited subset of these paths, causing important visual contributions to be underestimated. Motivated by these insights, we introduce VTrace, a multimodal token-attribution framework that traces input contributions through intermediate reasoning and calibrates attribution scores across modalities. VTrace constructs pairwise attributions that highlight token-specific contributions and aggregates all forward attribution paths in closed form to account for both direct and indirect contributions. Cross-modal calibration then rescales image and text attribution scores using modality contributions estimated from response-likelihood changes, enabling a unified ranking of input tokens. Evaluations against seven baselines across six visual reasoning benchmarks demonstrate the superior attribution faithfulness. Project page: https://vtrace-attribution.github.io/.

Object hallucination remains a major challenge for large vision-language models. While off-policy preference optimization proves to be an effective solution, on-policy reinforcement learning provides a more promising direction as it directly targets a model's current failure modes. However, we find that without fine-grained reward formulation and allocation, on-policy optimization often falls into an easy shortcut: reducing hallucinations merely by saying less---making fewer valid claims. To comprehensively resolve this, we propose a fine-grained alignment framework that couples dense reward signals at the data level with precise credit assignment at the algorithmic level. Specifically, we first construct the Dense Object Presence and Absence (DOPA) dataset to address sparse annotations that prevent valid object claims from being verified and rewarded. DOPA exhaustively annotates the deterministic presence and absence of every concept across an expanded vocabulary, significantly increasing the density of reliable reward signals during on-policy rollouts. Second, we propose Subsentence-level Credit Assignment for on-Policy Optimization (SCAPO) to prevent response-level shared advantages from allowing local hallucinations to compromise all other valid outputs within the same response. By assigning credit to each subsentence independently based on its object claims, SCAPO can precisely reinforce faithful generations and penalize hallucinations. Furthermore, we leverage the resulting faithful image descriptions as auxiliary context to transfer generative gains to discriminative tasks. Experiments demonstrate that our method produces highly informative, faithful descriptions in generative tasks while yielding clear performance gains on discriminative evaluation.

Vision-language models (VLMs) can read text in natural scenes, but their predictions may be influenced by the surrounding context. When the printed text conflicts with what the scene suggests, a model may return a more plausible word instead of the shown text. We introduce SceneFaith, a benchmark of 781 generated scene images for studying this behavior. Each output is classified as Literal, Canonical, or Other, separating faithful transcription from context-consistent rewriting and ordinary recognition errors. Across 15 models from seven families, all models show rewriting on clear images, with rates ranging from 8.45% to 58.51%. Controlled experiments further show that surrounding context matters: removing surrounding scene information reduces rewriting and improves literal accuracy, while changing the scene around the same text patch can also change model outputs. Moreover, weakening the target text with blur increases rewriting. These results show that reliable scene-text recognition requires VLMs to balance visual character evidence with contextual information, preserving clear text while using context mainly when the visual evidence is uncertain.

Vision-Language Models (VLMs) can produce Natural Language Explanations (NLEs) that sound plausible yet remain inconsistent with the visual evidence they cite. We present Explanation-Driven Counterfactual Testing (EDCT), an intervention-based protocol that extracts visual concepts cited in a model's explanation, applies verified minimal edits to them, and tests whether the resulting answer and explanation remain consistent with the edited image. Using this protocol, we create EDCT-Bench, a comprehensive benchmark spanning three complementary domains: knowledge-intensive visual question answering (OK-VQA), safety-critical driving (DriveLM), and 3D spatial reasoning (3DSRBench). Across the evaluated VLMs, EDCT reveals substantial faithfulness gaps, with models frequently producing responses inconsistent with verified visual changes. Finally, our fine-tuning study suggests that EDCT-generated counterfactuals provide high-impact training signals.

Vision-language models (VLMs) are increasingly used in settings where some input modalities may be unavailable, yet we know little about whether they can faithfully explain how such missing information affects their own predictions. We introduce an interventional protocol for evaluating self-explanations of modality dynamics: models state what each modality alone would support, whether restoring a missing modality would change their answer, and whether the available evidence is sufficient; we then execute the corresponding intervention and compare these claims with realized behavior. We evaluate ten VLMs spanning open-weight and proprietary models across four tasks covering mixed, redundant, and unique modality regimes. We find a systematic tendency to overstate the sufficiency of available evidence. Models substantially underestimate the effect of restoring missing modalities: executed change exceeds predicted change in 78 of 80 model-task-condition settings, with task-level median executed change rates reaching 70.1% while median predicted rates remain at most 9.6%. Insufficiency claims have low recall, leaving many cases in which behavior changes despite a stated claim of sufficiency. Retrospective self-explanations show the same tendency, over-crediting single-input sufficiency in mixed regimes and interchangeability in redundant ones. Together, these results show that VLMs systematically mischaracterize how their predictions depend on available and missing evidence, motivating executable interventions as a behavioral test of multimodal self-explanations.

Recent inference-time hallucination mitigation methods for large vision-language models (LVLMs) report strong gains on hallucination benchmarks. However, it remains unclear whether lower hallucination scores reflect improved multimodal grounding or more conservative generation. We evaluate six mitigation methods across three LVLMs and four benchmarks, including hallucination-focused evaluation and the diverse capability benchmark MMStar. Our analysis reveals two consistent patterns. First, hallucination reduction is often coupled with reduced informativeness: methods that lower hallucination rates also reduce object recall, visual coverage, or response detailedness. Second, improvements on hallucination benchmarks do not reliably transfer to broader multimodal capabilities, with methods showing inconsistent or degraded performance on fine-grained perception and reasoning tasks. Our findings suggest that current evaluation protocols may overestimate progress by rewarding conservative generation. We argue that hallucination mitigation should be evaluated as a faithfulness--informativeness--capability trade-off rather than through hallucination scores alone.

Whether attention weights faithfully reflect model reasoning has been actively debated in NLP, yet this question remains largely unexplored for the visual modality in Vision-Language Models (VLMs). We address this gap through causal perturbation analysis on current VLMs, evaluating both the comprehensiveness and sufficiency gap of attention-ranked visual tokens. Our analysis reveals that visual attention faithfulness is heterogeneous, manifesting in three distinct processing modes: Faithful-Sufficient, where top-$k$ attention tokens are both necessary and sufficient for prediction; Faithful-Distributed, where they are necessary but broader visual context remains required; and Non-Focal, where no localized attention region is individually necessary while visual information remains an essential trigger for prediction. Furthermore, human-annotated ground-truth regions satisfy comprehensiveness in only $\sim 60$% of cases compared with model attention rankings, revealing systematic divergence between model visual reliance and human intuition. We demonstrate these patterns across both general VQA on VQAv2 and document tasks on VRDU and ChartQA, showing that visual attention faithfulness varies systematically with processing demands and model architectures rather than being uniformly faithful or unfaithful.

Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs) integrate visual perception with language generation, enabling responses that span image understanding and complex reasoning. However, LVLMs do not just inherit the text-level hallucinations; they also hallucinate against the image, producing fluent responses ungrounded in what they see. This makes LVLM response scoring inherently harder, and our diagnostics show that existing confidence-based metrics adopted from LLMs are insufficient for LVLMs. Specifically, removing the input image barely changes confidence-based selection, suggesting that output-space confidence primarily captures textual plausibility rather than agreement with the image. To address this gap, we propose LookBack, a training-free LVLM response scoring method that augments token likelihood with visual lookback score, a lightweight measure of how strongly each response token refers to image tokens. Across four benchmarks and three models, LookBack consistently improves Best-of-$N$ selection over existing baselines with negligible additional overhead.

Modern vision language models (VLMs) turn high-resolution images into long sequences of visual tokens. Every token traverses the language decoder and persists in its prompt KV cache, inflating inference cost and motivating aggressive visual compression. Existing score-based methods assign each token an independent importance score and retain the Top-K. However, text queries consume collective, signed attention messages from the visual population, not isolated patches. Consequently, equally sized Top-K sets can repeatedly cover one salient region, omit sparse but complementary evidence and discard information carried by the removed population. We therefore formulate faithful visual compression as constructing a compact coreset for decoder messages, and introduce our training-free Grounded Message Coreset Pruning (GMC) which jointly allocates support across query-grounded, appearance, and coordinate-aware evidence, then transports discarded states into selected representatives at their original multimodal positions before physical compaction and native attention resume. This decomposes faithful compression into two coupled components, including selecting carriers that cover the required message modes and realizing the signed population message on those carriers. We further derive bounds connecting their errors to signed-message distortion, visual innovation, and candidate-margin stability. Experiments across multiple VLM families and diverse benchmarks demonstrate strong performance, with GMC-H2 retaining 97.78% Full-relative mean capability on Qwen2.5-VL-7B using 80.2% fewer visual tokens, while GMC-L16 reaches 100.36%. Controlled interventions verify that collective support and population realization jointly drive these gains.

Tool-integrated vision-language agents have made remarkable progress on compositional and multi-step visual reasoning. Yet their outputs frequently exhibit unfaithfulness: the stated reasoning path diverges from the computation that actually produced the answer, undermining reliability in safety-critical applications. We present DiffuseAgent-MI, a self-evolving agent whose perceptual grounding is governed by a KL-minimal energy model over feature units, providing a distributional view of visual mechanistic interpretability. The agent learns an energy landscape that softly constrains generated samples to lie near the native prior conditioned on the chosen interpretable unit, closing the gap between the explanation and the internal representation. A verifier then supplies trajectory-level faithfulness rewards, and a repair branch re-conditions the energy when the verifier flags an unfaithful step. On GeoQA, SciVis, VQA-v2 and an in-house multimodal reasoning set, DiffuseAgent-MI improves accuracy by up to 5.1 points over prior self-evolving agents while more than doubling mutual-information faithfulness and human-interpretability agreement. Our analysis shows the energy term and the verifier are complementary: the former guarantees distributional faithfulness, the latter trajectory-level faithfulness, and only their combination closes both gaps.

Despite remarkable progress in vision-language generation, Vision-Language Models (VLMs) remain prone to hallucinations, producing content that is inconsistent with or unsupported by the input image. Existing works largely design detection or mitigation methods around one specific hallucination pattern, such as visual-textual imbalance, but real VLM hallucinations arise from a mixture of multiple patterns, so signals bound to a single pattern struggle to remain stable across models and tasks. Under a unified head-level view, we find that hallucination-induced changes manifest as localized deviations from each head's faithful contextual behavior, a phenomenon we term Role-Break. Detailed analysis reveals that these deviations are systematically organized across attention heads, contextual sources, and deviation directions, and that the resulting signal is linearly readable once head identity is preserved. Based on these findings, we build a lightweight linear detector on top of Role-Break that requires no fine-tuning of the VLM, whose feature dimension stays below 5,000 and reaches an average AUROC of 93.23 across six VLMs and four benchmarks. A small-scale intervention experiment further shows that the detected tokens can be directly acted upon in the discriminative setting.

Agentic vision-language models (VLMs), which interleave textual reasoning with explicit tool calls such as cropping and code-based image manipulation, have emerged as a compelling paradigm for reliable and interpretable multi-modal reasoning. However, recent studies have revealed that such models often use tools unfaithfully. Many process images are irrelevant to the question (e.g., the crops miss the queried target), yet the tool call still receives full credit and the model still answers correctly. Such decorative or misaligned tool calls waste computation and reveal that the model does not faithfully use the evidence it retrieves. This may stem from two limitations of prevailing methods: the tool reward fails to distinguish useful from useless calls, and tool feedback carries no signal of usefulness. To this end, we introduce FaithEyes, a multi-agent self-judging framework. Concretely, we use a VLM to judge whether each process image helps answer the question. The judgement is injected into the reasoning context as part of the tool observation to help subsequent reasoning, and meanwhile is used to scale the tool reward by the helpful-tool ratio to suppress reward hacking. To keep judgement available at evaluation, we further design a multi-agent framework where the model itself serves as a subagent to judge the tool calls from the main agent, eliminating any dependence on external models at inference. Training via a two-stage SFT + RL pipeline on adapted open-source data, FaithEyes attains competitive or superior accuracy across visual perception and reasoning benchmarks, while substantially improving tool faithfulness and reducing inference cost. The homepage is at https://github.com/Mosi-AI/FaithEyes.

Medical vision-language models (VLMs) generate chain-of-thought (CoT) reasoning before answering clinical questions, but whether this reasoning causally influences predictions remains unclear. We present CoT-Mediate, a behavioral framework that perturbs a single clinically meaningful attribute within a model's own generated reasoning and measures whether the resulting prediction follows the edited reasoning. Our framework combines a dual-arm protocol comparing re-prompted evidence with prefix-forced continuation, together with a provenance-controlled intervention that varies only the attributed source of identical reasoning to disentangle reasoning mediation from sycophancy. We evaluate LLaVA-Med and MedGemma on 1,000 VQA-RAD samples each. Prefix-forced continuation consistently yields higher mediation faithfulness than re-prompting, while the provenance analysis reveals distinct model-specific deference behaviors. Across both models, removing visual evidence increases reliance on injected reasoning, whereas laterality is the least faithfully tracked clinical attribute. These results show that the mechanism used to inject reasoning substantially affects measured faithfulness and that contextual position, rather than stated provenance, is the primary determinant of whether medical VLMs use their generated reasoning.

Reinforcement Learning (RL) is an important paradigm for improving the reasoning capabilities of Vision-Language Models (VLMs). However, directly applying RL to rollout multimodal reasoning can lead to instability, due to the exploitation of language priors, the neglect of visual evidence, and the generation of reasoning traces that are fluent yet not visually grounded. The question arises: Can initially steer the policy toward visually faithful reasoning regime before applying reinforcement learning? To this end, we propose a Faithful Warm-Start (FWS) strategy that first curates samples with explicit vision-language causal relationships from six general VQA benchmarks to construct the FaithfulQA dataset, where each of the image-question pairs gains a certain degree of visual observations, question requirements, commonsense knowledge, domain knowledge, and the final answer. Subsequently, a VLM-based judge is employed to further purify the dataset, ensuring strong causal consistency and visual faithfulness. This warm-start stage equips the model with the capability to understand causally grounded vision-language patterns before subsequent RL optimization under sparse answer-level rewards. Experimental results show that such faithful supervision improves answer accuracy, stabilizes RL training, and reduces visually unsupported reasoning.

Despite the impressive capabilities of Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs), they remain susceptible to hallucination, generating content inconsistent with the input image. Recent studies attribute this to the dominance of language priors over visual inputs and employ contrastive decoding methods to mitigate this dominance, but the mechanistic origin remains unexplored. We investigate the information flow through each transformer layer and find that attention modules consistently aggregate visual evidence, while FFN modules at critical layers act as the source of language priors. These priors can override visual evidence, causing correct predictions in intermediate layers to drift toward incorrect outputs. Based on this insight, we propose FADE (FFN Attenuation for DEcoding), a training-free method that attenuates FFN outputs to reduce language-prior dominance. Evaluations on POPE, CHAIR, and MME benchmarks across LLaVA-1.5, mPLUG-Owl2, and InstructBLIP show that FADE effectively mitigates hallucinations while preserving inference efficiency.

Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs) exhibit sophisticated reasoning but remain susceptible to object hallucination. Deviating from the prevailing attention intensity assumption, we reveal a deeper dynamic structural misalignment: hallucination is triggered at decision-critical steps where specific attention heads, acting as risky mediators, decouple from visual evidence to lock onto language priors. This establishes a pathological shortcut that bypasses visual grounding. To dismantle this, we propose Fox (Faithfulness and Observational-flow via eXpression-rectification), a training-free inference-time framework. Fox diagnoses structural misalignment using a visual attention entropy probe to localize risky mediators unsupervisedly. We then execute a targeted causal intervention via numerical logit saturation to physically sever the shortcut path. Finally, a conflict-gated cooperative decoding strategy reconciles interventional faithfulness with observational fluency. Extensive experiments demonstrate that Fox achieves SOTA performance, outperforming SID by 29.1% while preserving linguistic richness. Code is available at https://github.com/Cc2021start/Fox.

Vision-Language Models (VLMs) remain prone to hallucinations, producing fluent but visually unfaithful outputs. Existing chain-of-thought and retrieval-augmented methods only partially address this, as they neither enforce step-level citation grounding nor route verification failures back to retrieval for correction. We present CaVe-VLM-CoT, a modular reflection-based agentic-RAG framework that enforces evidence-grounded reasoning through a five-stage closed-loop pipeline: Extractor, Retriever, Solver, Citation Injector, and Verifier, in which detected ungrounded claims trigger structured feedback to the Extractor for targeted re-retrieval. Since no existing framework jointly measures retrieval quality, step-wise citation faithfulness, and cross-modal grounding, we propose a suite of 23 component-wise metrics across all stages, anchored by CaVeScore, a composite metric weighting accuracy, citation precision and recall, attribution, and evidence grounding. Without any architectural or prompt modifications, CaVe-VLM-CoT achieves 87.1% accuracy and 56.6% CaVeScore on ScienceQA , and 55.2% accuracy and 35.7% CaVeScore on MMMU (30 subjects).

Vision-language models (VLMs) can answer image-based questions confidently, and often correctly, even when no image is provided. This mirage behavior inflates benchmark scores without reflecting visual grounding. Prior work treats this as a single failure mode. We argue it is two. Using Mirage Probes, a contrastive probing framework that pairs paraphrased question variants with matched mirage and non-mirage labels on the same image, we show that mirage behavior is linearly decodable from internal activations across residual stream, MLP, post-attention, and attention-head sites in two open-source VLMs. We demonstrate that a Naive Bayes text baseline cannot recover this signal, ruling out surface lexical confounds. Cross-benchmark separability patterns, together with a novel Prior Harnessing Index (PHI) measuring how much a model can answer from text alone, expose two distinct regimes: textual biases, where the model answers from language priors without engaging visual representations, and spurious images, where it constructs false visual content in latent space and answers as if grounded. The distinction has direct mitigation consequences: text-distribution cleaning can address the first regime but cannot reach the second, since spurious-image mirages live in the model's visual representations rather than its text. Faithful visual grounding will require interventions at the representational level.

Contrastive decoding (CD) seeks to mitigate hallucinations in Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs) by contrasting the output distributions of a standard model and a visually degraded model. However, existing training-free CD methods suffer from sub-optimal degraded branches: completely dropping visual tokens is too extreme and induces language hallucinations, while corrupting input images offers coarse control over visual evidence and suffers from high inference latency due to requiring two full forward passes. To address these dilemmas, we propose YARD, a training-free Y-Architecture Register Decoding framework. Motivated by the observation that reliable text-to-vision grounding predominantly emerges in the middle decoder layers, YARD constructs the degraded branch internally by sharing shallow-layer computations and branching exactly at this critical stage. For the degraded branch, YARD replaces patch-level visual tokens with register tokens, which preserve global image semantics but lack fine-grained local evidence. This image-aware yet locally under-grounded design provides a faithful contrastive signal without extreme modality mismatch, while the Y-architecture strictly avoids a costly second forward pass. Extensive experiments on generative and discriminative hallucination benchmarks demonstrate that YARD consistently achieves state-of-the-art hallucination mitigation across multiple LVLMs, alongside a significant reduction in inference latency.

Vision-language models (VLMs) generate fluent causal explanations, but current evaluations cannot distinguish linguistic plausibility from faithful causal reasoning. We introduce a dual-probe methodology that isolates these properties. The Text-Only Probe measures linguistic quality. The Chain-Text Probe requires models to first generate explicit causal chains. The Abstraction Gap (AG) metric quantifies the normalized performance difference. Evaluating eight VLMs on CAGE (Causal Abstraction Gap Evaluation), a benchmark of 49,500 questions across 5,500 images spanning Pearl's causal hierarchy, we find seven models exhibit AG exceeding 0.50 with text scores of 6--8 but chain scores below 2.5. Fine-tuning on 45,000 chain-annotated examples fails to close the gap. However, one model achieves near-zero AG. The capability exists within current VLM architectures and depends on pretraining and architectural choices. CAGE provides a diagnostic tool for assessing faithful causal reasoning in VLMs.

Reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) has emerged as a promising paradigm for advancing complex reasoning in large language models, and recent work extends RLVR to multimodal large language models (MLLMs). This transfer, however, surfaces a faithfulness challenge: faithful perception of task-relevant visual evidence and faithful use of that evidence during reasoning, leading to unsatisfactory gains on multimodal benchmarks. Specifically, existing perception supervision often operates on textual descriptions rather than natively on image regions, and faithful use is largely overlooked, exposing the perception-reasoning disconnect where correctly perceived evidence is dropped or contradicted during reasoning. To close these gaps, we propose Faithful-MR1, a training framework that anchors and reinforces visual attention to address both halves of faithful multimodal reasoning. The Anchoring stage turns perception into an explicit pre-reasoning subtask, supervising a dedicated <Focus> token's attention directly against image regions rather than through textual descriptions. The Reinforcing stage exposes faithful use through counterfactual image intervention, rewarding answer-correct trajectories that concentrate visual attention where vision causally matters. Extensive experiments demonstrate that Faithful-MR1 outperforms recent multimodal reasoning baselines on both Qwen2.5-VL-Instruct 3B and 7B backbones while using substantially less training data.

Vision-language models (VLMs) are increasingly augmented with continuous or latent non-textual tokens intended to support "visual thinking." Despite improved task accuracy, this alone does not show that models actually use these tokens for reasoning -- gains may arise from confounds such as added context length, special-token anchoring, or training-time regularization. We formalize a diagnostic principle, Ablate-to-Validate, for testing whether latent-token content is genuinely utilized, and instantiate it as the Token Replacement Test (TRT), a standardized suite of content-replacement ablations. TRT holds the prompt, image, token budget, and decoding fixed while replacing intermediate tokens with zero, random, first-repeat, or oracle alternatives, isolating whether performance depends on token content or merely on token presence. As a controlled testbed, we study relative depth reasoning with LLaVA-13B and Qwen2.5-VL-3B, training models to predict and consume continuous or discrete depth spans across multiple frozen encoders (SigLIP2, CLIP, DINOv2) and token budgets. We additionally apply TRT to three off-the-shelf visual-thinking systems (Mirage, Mull-Tokens, CoVT) on BLINK, VSP, and CV-Bench. Across all settings, accuracy gains are a misleading proxy for latent-token reasoning: VLMs retain most improvement even when token content is corrupted or replaced, revealing a persistent gap between having a latent channel and using it as an information bottleneck. We recommend TRT as a standard diagnostic alongside accuracy for any method introducing continuous thought tokens.

Large vision-language models (LVLMs) often hallucinate content that is fluent yet unsupported by the image, limiting their reliability in real-world deployment. We show that a key failure mode arises from route competition: even when visual tokens receive attention, the final token decision can be dominated by the textual pathway, causing the decoder to follow linguistic priors over visual evidence. To mitigate this, we propose a training-free, decision-aligned intervention that decomposes each attention head into a visual route and a text route, and estimates their token-level effects using an efficient one-forward/one-gradient approximation. These estimates reveal route conflict within heads and identify prior-dominant ones, enabling selective suppression of only the text route while keeping the visual route intact. Across five benchmarks spanning discriminative and generative settings, our method consistently reduces hallucination-related errors across models with limited impact on overall multimodal performance, while incurring a modest inference-time overhead.

Vision-Language Models (VLMs) increasingly power high-stakes applications, from medical imaging to autonomous systems, yet they routinely hallucinate, confidently describing content not present in the input. We investigate the root causes of these failure modes with a mechanistic analysis focusing on the decoder-based VLMs. We trace these failure modes to a geometric over-alignment: to bridge the modality gap required by attention mechanisms, decoder-based VLMs over-align visual embeddings with the text manifold, injecting a statistical linguistic bias that systematically overshadows fine-grained visual evidence. While prior work either aggressively closes this gap or suppresses hallucinations through expensive black-box decoding strategies, none addresses the underlying geometric cause. We provide the first quantitative characterization of this over-alignment, demonstrating that linguistic bias concentrates in the top principal components of a universal, dataset-agnostic text subspace. Building on this insight, we propose two complementary remedies: a training-free inference strategy and a bias-aware fine-tuning paradigm, both of which explicitly project out this subspace from visual representations. Our methods significantly reduce hallucinations across POPE, CHAIR, and AMBER benchmarks, and improve CLAIR scores on long-form captioning tasks, with the training-free variant adding no computational overhead over the base model.

Vision-Language Models (VLMs) exhibit strong performance in instruction following and open-ended vision-language reasoning, yet they frequently generate fluent outputs that are weakly grounded in visual evidence. Prior works have shown that instruction prompting further worsens this issue by amplifying language priors, especially when the visual signal is uncertain or ambiguous. To address this challenge, we propose a decoding framework that explicitly balances linguistic informativeness and visual faithfulness during generation. Our method, Instruction-Evidence Contrastive Dual-Stream Decoding (IECD$^2$), maintains two parallel probability distribution of tokens at each decoding step: an instruction-driven stream that promotes expressive and informative responses, and an evidence-driven stream that enforces strict grounding in the image. These two streams are adaptively fused using a symmetric KL-based contrastive gate, which suppresses tokens favored by language priors but unsupported by visual evidence, while preserving them when both distributions agree. We evaluate IECD$^2$ on multiple datasets spanning various generative vision-language reasoning tasks such as captioning and visual question answering on multiple datasets such as, POPE, MME, VQAv2, AMBER, and MSCOCO. IECD$^2$ demonstrates consistent improvements in task accuracy and reasoning performance with substantial reduction in hallucination compared to state-of-the-art decoding approaches.

Vision-Language Models (VLMs) are frequently undermined by object hallucination--generating content that contradicts visual reality--due to an over-reliance on linguistic priors. We introduce Positive-and-Negative Decoding (PND), a training-free inference framework that intervenes directly in the decoding process to enforce visual fidelity. PND is motivated by our key finding of a critical attention deficit in VLMs, where visual features are empirically under-weighted. Our framework corrects this via a dual-path contrast: The positive path amplifies salient visual evidence using multi-layer attention to encourage faithful descriptions, directly counteracting the attention deficit. Simultaneously, the negative path identifies and degrades the core object's features to create a strong counterfactual, which penalizes ungrounded, prior-dominant generation. By contrasting the model's outputs from these two perspectives at each step, PND steers generation towards text that is not just linguistically probable, but visually factual. Extensive experiments on benchmarks like POPE, MME, and CHAIR show that PND achieves state-of-the-art performance with up to 6.5% accuracy improvement, substantially reducing object hallucination while also enhancing descriptive detail--all without requiring any model retraining. The method generalizes effectively across diverse VLM architectures including LLaVA, InstructBLIP, InternVL, and Qwen-VL.

Vision-Language Models (VLMs) are frequently undermined by object hallucination, generating content that contradicts visual reality, due to an over-reliance on linguistic priors. We introduce Positive-and-Negative Decoding (PND), a training-free inference framework that intervenes directly in the decoding process to enforce visual fidelity. PND is motivated by our finding of an attention imbalance in VLMs, where visual features are under-weighted. Our framework introduces a dual-path contrast: a positive path that amplifies visual evidence and a negative path that constructs counterfactuals to penalize prior-dominant generation. By contrasting outputs from both paths during decoding, PND steers generation toward visually grounded results. Experiments on POPE, MME, and CHAIR demonstrate state-of-the-art performance without retraining.

Video Temporal Grounding (VTG) aims to localize specific video segments corresponding to natural language queries. While recent Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs) employ Reinforcement Learning to generate Chains-of-Thought (CoT), they typically rely solely on outcome-based supervision. Consequently, this often leads to hallucinations, where the reasoning process becomes disconnected from the visual content and the final prediction. Existing attempts to mitigate this by relying on external supervision from larger models or separate reward models are computationally expensive and prone to rigid patterns. To address these challenges, we propose TAR (Temporal Anchor-Constrained Reasoning), a framework that introduces the temporal anchor (T-anchor) as a transparent and auditable checkpoint mechanism. T-anchor enforces progressive refinement within the CoT, compelling the model to continuously ground its intermediate thoughts in visual evidence and iteratively calibrate temporal predictions, thereby significantly enhancing the faithfulness and autonomy of the reasoning process and final accuracy. Furthermore, we introduce a bootstrapping paradigm that automatically harvests high-quality CoT data using only a standard 7B model, eliminating the dependency on ultra-large models. Extensive experiments demonstrate that TAR achieves state-of-the-art performance and generates faithful, autonomous, and progressively refined reasoning traces.