VLM Reasoning
VLM: Vision-Language Model
Overview
This field studies how models connect images or video with language to solve tasks involving spatial relations, time, causality, diagrams, and action. Common approaches include chain-of-thought prompting, visual tools and retrieval, structured representations such as scene graphs, and fine-tuning with process-level rewards. Benchmarks increasingly test whether answers and intermediate steps are grounded in visual evidence, including in multi-image, video, scientific, and embodied settings. A central tension is that longer reasoning can help on complex tasks but can also weaken visual grounding, amplify language-based shortcuts, or produce explanations that do not reflect how an answer was reached.
Latest papers
853 papers96 papers in the last four weeks, up 48% on the four weeks before. 0.6% of all new papers.
A Reasoning-Enabled Vision-Language Foundation Model for Chest X-ray Interpretation
All Roads Lead to Rome: Incentivizing Divergent Thinking in Vision-Language Models
PRISM: A Multi-View Multi-Capability Retail Video Dataset for Embodied Vision-Language Models
Omni-NegCLIP: Enhancing CLIP with Front-Layer Contrastive Fine-Tuning for Comprehensive Negation Understanding
Internalized Reasoning for Long-Context Visual Document Understanding
<think> tags, gated by a <cot> control token, and the resulting reasoning capability is internalized via low-strength model merging. We study Qwen3 VL 32B and Mistral Small 3.1 24B. With Qwen3 VL, we achieve 58.3 on MMLongBenchDoc, surpassing the 7 larger Qwen3 VL 235B A22B (57.0). With Mistral, we show that synthetic reasoning outperforms distillation from the Thinking version's traces by 3.8 points on MMLBD-C, and internalized reasoning exhibits 12.4 fewer mean output tokens compared to explicit reasoning. We release our pipeline for reproducibility and further exploration.Navigating the Mirage: A Dual-Path Agentic Framework for Robust Misleading Chart Question Answering
Learning Multi-View Spatial Reasoning from Cross-View Relations
Difference Feedback: Generating Multimodal Process-Level Supervision for VLM Reinforcement Learning
Bridging Visual Representation and Reinforcement Learning from Verifiable Rewards in Large Vision-Language Models
Inference-Time Structural Reasoning for Compositional Vision-Language Understanding
Reasoning-Driven Anomaly Detection and Localization with Image-Level Supervision
VIRST: Video-Instructed Reasoning Assistant for SpatioTemporal Segmentation
HandVQA: Diagnosing and Improving Fine-Grained Spatial Reasoning about Hands in Vision-Language Models
Mitigating the Reasoning Tax in Vision-Language Fine-Tuning with Input-Adaptive Depth Aggregation
From Pixels to BFS: High Maze Accuracy Does Not Imply Visual Planning
LanteRn: Latent Visual Structured Reasoning
Bridging Perception and Reasoning: Token Reweighting for RLVR in Multimodal LLMs
Sparse Visual Thought Circuits in Vision-Language Models
Video-Only ToM: Enhancing Theory of Mind in Multimodal Large Language Models
RVLM: Recursive Vision-Language Models with Adaptive Depth
Can VLMs Reason Robustly? A Neuro-Symbolic Investigation
Limits of Spatial Imagery Reasoning in Frontier LLM Models
Imagery Module'' -- a tool capable of rendering and rotating 3D models -- can bridge this gap, functioning as a cognitive prosthetic.'' We conducted experiments using a dual-module architecture in which a reasoning module (an MLLM) interacts with an imagery module on 3D model rotation tasks. Performance was lower than expected, with accuracy reaching at most 62.5%. Further investigation suggests that even when the burden of maintaining and manipulating a holistic 3D state is outsourced, the system still fails. This reveals that current frontier models lack the foundational visual-spatial primitives required to interface with imagery. Specifically, they lack: (1) the low-level sensitivity to extract spatial signals such as (a) depth, (b) motion, and (c) short-horizon dynamic prediction; and (2) the capacity to reason contemplatively over images, dynamically shifting visual focus and balancing imagery with symbolic and associative information.