Reasoning for VLMs

Vision-language models (VLMs) are increasingly deployed in high-stakes settings where reliable uncertainty quantification (UQ) is as important as predictive accuracy. Extended reasoning via chain-of-thought (CoT) prompting or reasoning-trained models has become ubiquitous in modern VLM pipelines, yet its effect on UQ reliability remains poorly understood. Our results show that reasoning tends to degrade the quality of many uncertainty estimates, even when it improves task accuracy. We identify implicit answer conditioning as the primary mechanism: as reasoning traces converge on a conclusion before the final answer is generated, token probabilities increasingly reflect consistency with the model's own reasoning trace rather than uncertainty about correctness. In effect, the model becomes overconfident in its answer. In contrast, agreement-based consistency remains robust and often improves under reasoning, making it a practical choice for uncertainty estimation in reasoning-enabled VLMs.

Vision-Language Models (VLMs) demonstrate strong general-purpose reasoning but remain limited in physics-grounded anomaly detection, where causal understanding of dynamics is essential. Existing VLMs, trained predominantly on appearance-centric correlations, fail to capture kinematic constraints, leading to poor performance on anomalies such as irregular rotations or violated mechanical motions. We introduce a physics-informed instruction tuning framework that explicitly encodes object properties, motion paradigms, and dynamic constraints into structured prompts. By delivering these physical priors through multi-turn dialogues, our method decomposes causal reasoning into incremental steps, enabling robust internal representations of normal and abnormal dynamics. Evaluated on the Phys-AD benchmark, our approach achieves 96.7% AUROC in video-level detection--substantially outperforming prior SOTA (66.9%)--and yields superior causal explanations (0.777 LLM score). This work highlights how structured physics priors can transform VLMs into reliable detectors of dynamic anomalies.

With the growing number and diversity of Vision-Language Models (VLMs), many works explore language-based ensemble, collaboration, and routing techniques across multiple VLMs to improve multi-model reasoning. In contrast, we address the diverse model selection using both vision and language modalities. We introduce focal error diversity to capture complementary reasoning across VLMs and a CKA-based focal diversity metric (CKA-focal) to measure disagreement in their visual embeddings. On the constructed ensemble surface from a pool of candidate VLMs, we applied a Genetic Algorithm to effectively prune out those component VLMs that do not add value to the fusion performance. We identify the best combination for each task as well as fuse the outputs of each VLMs in the model pool, and show that heterogeneous models can capture epistemic uncertainty dynamically and mitigate hallucinations. Our V3Fusion approach is capable of producing dual focal-diversity fused predictions with high performance for vision-language reasoning, even when there is no majority consensus or the majority of VLMs make incorrect predictions. Extensive experiments validate V3Fusion on four popular VLM benchmarks (A-OKVQA, MMMU, MMMU-Pro, and OCR-VQA). The results show that V3Fusion outperforms the best-performing VLM on MMMU by 8.09% and MMMU-Pro by 4.87% gain in accuracy. For generative tasks, V3Fusion outperforms Intern-VL2-8b and Qwen2.5-VL-7b, the top-2 VLM performers on both A-OKVQA and OCR-VQA. Our code and datasets are available at https://github.com/sftekin/v3fusion.

The lack of reasoning capabilities in Vision-Language Models (VLMs) has remained at the forefront of research discourse. We posit that this behavior stems from a reporting bias in their training data. That is, how people communicate about visual content by default omits tacit information needed to supervise some types of reasoning; e.g., "at the game today!" is a more likely caption than "a photo of 37 people standing behind a field". We investigate the data underlying the popular VLMs OpenCLIP, LLaVA-1.5 and Molmo through the lens of theories from pragmatics, and find that reporting bias results in insufficient representation of four reasoning skills (spatial, temporal, negation, and counting), despite the corpora being of web-scale, and/or synthetically generated. With a set of curated benchmarks, we demonstrate that: (i) VLMs perform poorly on the aforementioned types of reasoning suppressed in the training data by reporting bias; (ii) contrary to popular belief, scaling data size, model size, and to multiple languages does not result in emergence of these skills by default; but, promisingly, (iii) incorporating annotations specifically collected to obtain tacit information is effective. Our findings highlight the need for more intentional training data curation methods, rather than counting on scale for emergence of reasoning capabilities.

Vision-Language Models (VLM) exhibit strong reasoning capabilities, showing promise for end-to-end autonomous driving systems. Chain-of-Thought (CoT), as VLM's widely used reasoning strategy, is facing critical challenges. Existing textual CoT has a large gap between text semantic space and trajectory physical space. Although the recent approach utilizes future image to replace text as CoT process, it lacks clear planning-oriented objective guidance to generate images with accurate scene evolution. To address these, we innovatively propose MindDriver, a progressive multimodal reasoning framework that enables VLM to imitate human-like progressive thinking for autonomous driving. MindDriver presents semantic understanding, semantic-to-physical space imagination, and physical-space trajectory planning. To achieve aligned reasoning processes in MindDriver, we develop a feedback-guided automatic data annotation pipeline to generate aligned multimodal reasoning training data. Furthermore, we develop a progressive reinforcement fine-tuning method to optimize the alignment through progressive high- level reward-based learning. MindDriver demonstrates superior performance in both nuScences open-loop and Bench2Drive closed-loop evaluation. Codes are available at https://github.com/hotdogcheesewhite/MindDriver.

Vision-language models (VLMs) aim to reason by jointly leveraging visual and textual modalities. While allocating additional inference-time computation has proven effective for large language models (LLMs), achieving similar scaling in VLMs remains challenging. A key obstacle is that visual inputs are typically provided only once at the start of generation, while textual reasoning (e.g., early visual summaries) is generated autoregressively, causing reasoning to become increasingly text-dominated and allowing early visual grounding errors to accumulate. Moreover, vanilla guidance for visual grounding during inference is often coarse and noisy, making it difficult to steer reasoning over long texts. To address these challenges, we propose Saliency-Aware Principle (SAP) selection. SAP operates on high-level reasoning principles rather than token-level trajectories, which enable stable control over discrete generation under noisy feedback while allowing later reasoning steps to re-consult visual evidence when renewed grounding is required. In addition, SAP supports multi-route inference, enabling parallel exploration of diverse reasoning behaviors. SAP is model-agnostic and data-free, requiring no additional training. Empirical results show that SAP achieves competitive performance, especially in reducing object hallucination, under comparable token-generation budgets while yielding more stable reasoning and lower response latency than CoT-style long sequential reasoning.

Foundation models, including vision language models, are increasingly used in automated driving to interpret scenes, recommend actions, and generate natural language explanations. However, existing evaluation methods primarily assess outcome based performance, such as safety and trajectory accuracy, without determining whether model decisions reflect human relevant considerations. As a result, it remains unclear whether explanations produced by such models correspond to genuine reason responsive decision making or merely post hoc rationalizations. This limitation is especially significant in safety critical domains because it can create false confidence. To address this gap, we propose CARE Drive, Context Aware Reasons Evaluation for Driving, a model agnostic framework for evaluating reason responsiveness in vision language models applied to automated driving. CARE Drive compares baseline and reason augmented model decisions under controlled contextual variation to assess whether human reasons causally influence decision behavior. The framework employs a two stage evaluation process. Prompt calibration ensures stable outputs. Systematic contextual perturbation then measures decision sensitivity to human reasons such as safety margins, social pressure, and efficiency constraints. We demonstrate CARE Drive in a cyclist overtaking scenario involving competing normative considerations. Results show that explicit human reasons significantly influence model decisions, improving alignment with expert recommended behavior. However, responsiveness varies across contextual factors, indicating uneven sensitivity to different types of reasons. These findings provide empirical evidence that reason responsiveness in foundation models can be systematically evaluated without modifying model parameters.

How does irrelevant information (i.e., distractors) affect test-time scaling in vision-language models (VLMs)? Prior work on text-only language models has shown that textual distractors can intensify inverse scaling, causing models to reason longer but less effective reasoning traces. In this work, we investigate whether similar phenomena arise in multimodal settings. We introduce Idis (Images with distractors), a visual question-answering dataset that systematically varies distractors along semantic and numerical dimensions. Our analyses reveal that visual distractors affect reasoning VLMs in a fundamentally different way from textual distractors: although inverse scaling still emerges, visual distractors reduce accuracy without increasing reasoning length. We further show that attribute counts extracted from reasoning traces provide key insights into how distractors interact with reasoning length and accuracy. As a sanity check, we propose a simple prompting strategy that mitigates distractor-driven predictions in reasoning vision-language models.

A common belief in multimodal research is that the perceptual weaknesses of vision--language models can be compensated by stronger language reasoning (e.g., chain-of-thought, in-context learning, or external tools). We challenge this assumption. We argue that for a broad class of visual tasks hard to specify in language, failures stem from a structural fatality where the temporal decision of when to reason strictly dictates the spatial constraint of where reasoning takes place. When visual reasoning is deferred to language generation, current architectures do not merely delay computation; they displace it from the continuous visual representation to a discrete textual space. Consequently, the sequential Perception-then-Reasoning'' paradigm degenerates perception into a passive, one-off feature encoding process, rendering it functionally equivalent to Reasoning-in-Text-Space'', where task-critical spatial signals are collapsed before reasoning begins. We substantiate this claim with the Turing Eye Test (TET): tasks that must be resolved in visual space and are hard to verbalize; results show text-only reasoning cannot remedy these perceptual failures. Our findings suggest rethinking the architectural divide: shifting from reasoning about perception to reasoning within perception. This facilitates actively reasoning-driven perception that operates directly on pixel-level visual representations, rather than within a collapsed textual space.