Skip to content
aiqbench takeAI Research

aiqbench analysis

This paper introduces FPCO-Dialog, a new benchmark designed to evaluate how vision-language models correct and cooperate when faced with repeated false premises in multi-turn dialogues. By testing 20 commercial and open-source VLMs against systematically generated visual falsehoods, the study reveals significant cross-model differences in correction tendencies that are often overlooked in standard evaluations. The release of this dataset and protocol provides a critical tool for assessing the robustness and reliability of next-generation multimodal AI systems.
Source coveringarXiv
What this isA model's reading of the article and related coverage, written for aiqbench. Not the publisher's words.

FPCO-Dialog: A Multi-Turn False-Premise Benchmark for Correction and Cooperation in Vision-Language Models

arXiv2 min read

arXiv:2609.03331v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Vision-language models (VLMs) are increasingly deployed in multi-turn settings where users may describe visual content with incorrect assumptions. Yet existing evaluations rarely isolate how models respond when the same visually grounded false premise persists across dialogue turns. We introduce FPCO-Dialog, a benchmark for evaluating correction and cooperation behavior in VLMs under repeated false premises. FPCO-Dialog contains 1,080 images and 10,800 question turns, stratified by visual complexity, object category, and false-premise class, and uses a 10-turn protocol in which a correct dialogue prefix is followed by repeated false-premise referring expressions. We evaluate 20 commercial and open-source VLMs with a model-agnostic protocol and CorrTP@K, a correction-rate metric over false-premise turns, scored by two independent detectors. FPCO-Dialog reveals substantial and persistent cross-model differences in aggregate correction tendency, model-specific turn-wise dynamics, and systematic variation across false-premise types under the benchmark's substitution distribution. The dataset, evaluation protocol, model outputs, detector labels, and code are available.

Abstract:Vision-language models (VLMs) are increasingly deployed in multi-turn settings where users may describe visual content with incorrect assumptions. Yet existing evaluations rarely isolate how models respond when the same visually grounded false premise persists across dialogue turns. We introduce FPCO-Dialog, a benchmark for evaluating correction and cooperation behavior in VLMs under repeated false premises. FPCO-Dialog contains 1,080 images and 10,800 question turns, stratified by visual complexity, object category, and false-premise class, and uses a 10-turn protocol in which a correct dialogue prefix is followed by repeated false-premise referring expressions. We evaluate 20 commercial and open-source VLMs with a model-agnostic protocol and CorrTP@K, a correction-rate metric over false-premise turns, scored by two independent detectors. FPCO-Dialog reveals substantial and persistent cross-model differences in aggregate correction tendency, model-specific turn-wise dynamics, and systematic variation across false-premise types under the benchmark's substitution distribution. The dataset, evaluation protocol, model outputs, detector labels, and code are available.

Accepted at EMNLP2026 Main Conference. For code and data, see this https URL

Computation and Language (cs.CL)

arXiv:2609.03331 [cs.CL]

(or arXiv:2609.03331v1 [cs.CL] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.03331 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Full text under the publisher's open licence · 258 words

Related coverage