Question-Guided Evidence Acquisition for Multimodal Visual Question Answering

arXiv:2608.19739v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Multimodal LLMs can see a document, but they often can't read it reliably. Small text, tables, visual cues, and topological elements still trip them up under direct visual inference, even when the page is already sitting in the model's context. Most document-VQA systems treat perception as fixed: they encode the page once, ask the question, and answer from whatever the model happened to extract in that single fast pass. We think document VQA needs slower, more deliberate perception: rather than answering from one fixed encoding, the model should spend a bit of extra compute at inference time working out what to look at next, and only then answer. We build this into \textbf{Q-Guide}, a small agent that reads a question, works out what evidence it is still missing, and calls targeted tool(s) to recover it---reading text where text is needed, zooming in where detail is needed, or grounding a region where position matters. On DocVQA2026 and Manga109, Q-Guide outperforms both direct prompting and recent multi-agent document systems ($65.0\%$ vs.\ $40.0\%$ on DocVQA2026, $32.4\%$ vs.\ $24.4\%$ on Manga109), and the improvement holds across three Claude backbones (Opus 4.6, Sonnet 4.6, and Opus 4.5). We find that accuracy scales with the perception budget---most of the gain appears within two to three deliberate rounds---and that the gain comes from directing perception to the right place, not from complex control logic: adding planners, routers, or multiple collaborating agents does not help.

Abstract:Multimodal LLMs can see a document, but they often can't read it reliably. Small text, tables, visual cues, and topological elements still trip them up under direct visual inference, even when the page is already sitting in the model's context. Most document-VQA systems treat perception as fixed: they encode the page once, ask the question, and answer from whatever the model happened to extract in that single fast pass. We think document VQA needs slower, more deliberate perception: rather than answering from one fixed encoding, the model should spend a bit of extra compute at inference time working out what to look at next, and only then answer. We build this into \textbf{Q-Guide}, a small agent that reads a question, works out what evidence it is still missing, and calls targeted tool(s) to recover it---reading text where text is needed, zooming in where detail is needed, or grounding a region where position matters. On DocVQA2026 and Manga109, Q-Guide outperforms both direct prompting and recent multi-agent document systems ($65.0\%$ vs.\ $40.0\%$ on DocVQA2026, $32.4\%$ vs.\ $24.4\%$ on Manga109), and the improvement holds across three Claude backbones (Opus 4.6, Sonnet 4.6, and Opus 4.5). We find that accuracy scales with the perception budget---most of the gain appears within two to three deliberate rounds---and that the gain comes from directing perception to the right place, not from complex control logic: adding planners, routers, or multiple collaborating agents does not help.

Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (cs.CV); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Machine Learning (cs.LG)

arXiv:2608.19739 [cs.CV]

(or arXiv:2608.19739v1 [cs.CV] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2608.19739 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.

aiqbench analysis

Question-Guided Evidence Acquisition for Multimodal Visual Question Answering

Related coverage