Skip to content
aiqbench takeAI Research

aiqbench analysis

This research exposes critical reliability gaps in multimodal agentic search systems by identifying "silent failures" where final answer accuracy masks flawed reasoning trajectories. The authors propose a six-category taxonomy to diagnose issues like phantom grounding and cross-modal contradictions, demonstrating that surface-level correctness often overestimates true capability across frontier models. For developers building tool-using AI agents, this work provides an essential diagnostic framework for evaluating evidence-grounding quality beyond simple output verification.
Source coveringarXiv
What this isA model's reading of the article and related coverage, written for aiqbench. Not the publisher's words.

Silent Failures in Multimodal Agentic Search:A Diagnostic Taxonomy and Cross-Judge Evaluation

arXiv2 min read

arXiv:2607.19793v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Multimodal agentic search systems increasingly rely on external tools to answer knowledge-intensive visual questions. However, existing evaluations mainly focus on final-answer accuracy and may miss failures in the search trajectory. In this work, we study such hidden reliability issues as silent failures. We introduce a six-category taxonomy covering modality shortcuts, phantom grounding, wrong-evidence-right-answer cases, over-retrieval laundering, cross-modal contradiction, and provenance hallucination. Based on this taxonomy, we build a trajectory-level diagnostic pipeline that evaluates both answer correctness and evidence-grounding quality under a unified ReAct-style scaffold. Experiments on MMSearch-Plus trajectories across four frontier multimodal models show that surface accuracy consistently overestimates true trajectory-level correctness. We further use cross-judge validation, blank-image stress tests, and tool ablations to show that silent failures are capability-dependent and often shift rather than disappear. Home-page: https://github.com/DingWu1021/silent-failures-multimodal-agentic-search

Abstract:Multimodal agentic search systems increasingly rely on external tools to answer knowledge-intensive visual questions. However, existing evaluations mainly focus on final-answer accuracy and may miss failures in the search trajectory. In this work, we study such hidden reliability issues as silent failures. We introduce a six-category taxonomy covering modality shortcuts, phantom grounding, wrong-evidence-right-answer cases, over-retrieval laundering, cross-modal contradiction, and provenance hallucination. Based on this taxonomy, we build a trajectory-level diagnostic pipeline that evaluates both answer correctness and evidence-grounding quality under a unified ReAct-style scaffold. Experiments on MMSearch-Plus trajectories across four frontier multimodal models show that surface accuracy consistently overestimates true trajectory-level correctness. We further use cross-judge validation, blank-image stress tests, and tool ablations to show that silent failures are capability-dependent and often shift rather than disappear. Home-page: this https URL

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

arXiv:2607.19793 [cs.AI]

(or arXiv:2607.19793v1 [cs.AI] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2607.19793 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 · 230 words

Related coverage