Skip to content
Preprint

Failing to See or Failing to Know? Attributing Errors in Vision-Language Models

Jul 2026 · 0 citations · 47 references
Computer Science

TL;DR

A tree-structured framework is proposed that organizes failures in knowledge-intensive visual question answering into model-specific operational outcomes that support attribution-guided routing to targeted interventions, including image repair, entity support, question rewriting, and factual evidence.

Abstract

Vision-language models (VLMs) can recognize entities in clear images yet still fail when answering questions that require factual knowledge beyond what is directly observable. Prior work has either examined individual failure modes in isolation or treated incorrect answers as monolithic, binary failures. We propose a tree-structured framework that organizes failures in knowledge-intensive visual question answering into model-specific operational outcomes. Across two datasets and four VLMs, we observe consistent distributions of operational outcomes: some failures occur before entity recognition, while others persist after the relevant entity is recognized. Visual token representations are most informative for recognition-related decisions. Prompt hidden states predict answer success more effectively, although factual-access attribution remains difficult and exhibits only a weak signal. These pre-generation signals support attribution-guided routing to targeted interventions, including image repair, entity support, question rewriting, and factual evidence.

View source

Similar papers

Jul 2026

How Do VLMs Fail? Vision-Operation Misalignment in Compositional VQA

An Operation-centric mechanistic framework is introduced that decomposes VLM failures by both the reasoning operation where they originate and the internal computational pathway through which they propagate and provides a principled basis for targeted diagnosis of VLM failures in multimedia reasoning.

Navya Gupta, Bingjie Xu, Avinash Anand et al. · 0 citations
Jul 2026

MissingBench-Verified: Probing Vision-Language Models' Inability to Detect Missing Object Parts

MissingBench-Verified is presented, a benchmark designed to evaluate a specific and practically relevant scenario: when vision-language models fail to recognize that an essential component of an object has been removed, indicating that this failure mode cannot be addressed through current prompting or post-hoc correcti...

W. Guo, Qi Qian, Shiyu Zhou et al. · 0 citations
Jul 2026

Seeing or Knowing? Visual Context Sensitivity in Multimodal Large Language Models

For the coarse attributes the authors study, MLLMs encode the visual evidence but cannot reliably control their reliance on it, indicating that for the coarse attributes they study, MLLMs cannot reliably control their reliance on it.

Jiaang Li, Chengzu Li, Zhaochong An et al. · 0 citations
Preprint Aug 2026

SAVER: Selective Auditing of Verbal Evidence for Error Recovery in VLM Change Reasoning

SAVER (Selective Auditing of Verbal Evidence for Error Recovery), a lightweight, rule-based method that parses VLM responses for this evidence and triggers structured reprompting only when evidence is missing or inconsistent, significantly improves accuracy on tasks where errors stem from the model failing to articulat...

Youdi Li · 0 citations
#artificial intelligence Preprint Sep 2026

FailBench: How Reliable are VLMs at Judging Robot Task Success?

This work introduces FailBench, a benchmark for robot failure detection comprising 2,197 manipulation attempts across 14 public sources (12 real-world, 2 simulated), and shows that input-level intervention--spatially localizing and cropping outcome-relevant regions--improves the top detector by 2.4 percentage points wi...

Zaruhi Navasardyan, Tatul Danielyan, Hrant Davtyan · 1 citation

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.