Artificial Intelligence · 26.08.2026, 08:17 UTC
Is Visual Prompting All You Need? Studying VLM Spatial Reasoning under Progressive Visual Scaffolds
| Schweregrad | info |
|---|---|
| Kategorie | Artificial Intelligence |
| Quelle | arXiv cs.AI ↗ |
| Veröffentlicht | 26.08.2026 UTC |
Sicherheitsmeldung mit Schweregrad noch nicht bewertet. Technische Details im Tab „Originaltext“; empfohlene Schritte in der Checkliste.
arXiv:2608.21170v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Vision-language models (VLMs) have advanced rapidly in multimodal reasoning, yet recent work shows that their failures often reflect an interaction between visual grounding and downstream reasoning. What remains less clear is how the visual presentation of a task shapes model performance and failure modes when the underlying reasoning problem is unchanged. We study this question in SPaRC, a benchmark for grid-based visual spatial planning, by introducing lightweight input-side scaffolds that preserve the visual modality while making spatial structure more accessible. Across multiple VLMs, these scaffolds improve task accuracy over the original visual setting by up to 34.0 percentage points and further complement GRPO-based training, yielding up to 4.6 additional accuracy points compared with near-zero gains on the original visual input. Analyses on both end-to-end task solving and object detection show that these gains are closely tied to reductions in grounding-related errors, while rule reasoning remains comparatively challenging. We find that visual presentation is a central factor that determines whether VLM benchmarks measure grounded perception, downstream reasoning, or a mixture of both.
Maßnahmen
⬇ Als MarkdownVerwandte Beiträge
- info Focal Calibration Loss: Controlling Posterior Distortion in Deep Neural Classifiers
- info Quantum Maximum Entropy Inference and Hamiltonian Learning
- info Polynomial-Augmented Neural Networks (PANNs) with Weak Orthogonality Constraints for Enhanced Function and PDE Approximation
- info AdAdaGrad: Adaptive Batch Size Schemes for Adaptive Gradient Methods