analiza aiqbench
This research investigates how vision-language models dynamically shift reliance between text and image inputs when one modality becomes degraded, revealing task-dependent behaviors rather than fixed preferences. By introducing controlled conflicts in arithmetic problems and chart reports, the study demonstrates that model behavior varies significantly based on evidence structure and evaluation settings. These findings are critical for understanding the robustness and reliability of multimodal AI systems under real-world noisy conditions.
Which Source Wins? Task-Dependent Reliance in Vision-Language Models
arXiv:2608.17205v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Vision-language models (VLMs) combine images and text, but when the two conflict and one becomes harder to read, it is unclear how a model shifts its reliance between them. We study this modality reallocation with a controlled setup: we degrade either the image or the text across four levels of legibility while keeping the other clean, and track how the model's preference changes. We build conflicts from GSM8K and SVAMP by pairing the rendered image of one arithmetic problem with the text of another, so the two sources support different answers. We also introduce ChartQA-Conflict, a manually reviewed benchmark of 229 chart-report conflicts with matched chart and table-image representations. We evaluate six open-weight VLMs using both generated answers and a length-normalized conditional log-likelihood margin. On GSM8K and SVAMP, five of six models shift more strongly away from degraded text than from degraded images. On ChartQA-Conflict, all six likelihood-scored models exhibit the opposite pattern, shifting more strongly away from the degraded visual source. This reversal persists after calibrating for unimodal accuracy loss and after replacing charts with plain table images. Two frontier API models, GPT-5.6-Luna and Gemini-3.5-Flash, behaviorally replicate the ChartQA-Conflict reversal, with GPT-5.6-Luna also matching the arithmetic direction. These results show that modality reliance in VLMs is not fixed, but varies across tasks, evidence structures, models, and evaluation settings. The source code is available at https://github.com/Ro-netizen004/multimodal-arbitration-artifact.
Title:Which Source Wins? Task-Dependent Reliance in Vision-Language Models
Abstract:Vision-language models (VLMs) combine images and text, but when the two conflict and one becomes harder to read, it is unclear how a model shifts its reliance between them. We study this modality reallocation with a controlled setup: we degrade either the image or the text across four levels of legibility while keeping the other clean, and track how the model's preference changes. We build conflicts from GSM8K and SVAMP by pairing the rendered image of one arithmetic problem with the text of another, so the two sources support different answers. We also introduce ChartQA-Conflict, a manually reviewed benchmark of 229 chart-report conflicts with matched chart and table-image representations. We evaluate six open-weight VLMs using both generated answers and a length-normalized conditional log-likelihood margin. On GSM8K and SVAMP, five of six models shift more strongly away from degraded text than from degraded images. On ChartQA-Conflict, all six likelihood-scored models exhibit the opposite pattern, shifting more strongly away from the degraded visual source. This reversal persists after calibrating for unimodal accuracy loss and after replacing charts with plain table images. Two frontier API models, GPT-5.6-Luna and Gemini-3.5-Flash, behaviorally replicate the ChartQA-Conflict reversal, with GPT-5.6-Luna also matching the arithmetic direction. These results show that modality reliance in VLMs is not fixed, but varies across tasks, evidence structures, models, and evaluation settings. The source code is available at this https URL.
20 pages. Under review
Computation and Language (cs.CL); Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (cs.CV)
arXiv:2608.17205 [cs.CL]
(or arXiv:2608.17205v1 [cs.CL] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2608.17205 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.
Text integral sub licența deschisă a publicației · 341 cuvinte
Subiecte conexe

Jev: System One models for Prod, not God — with Diogo Almeida, CEO, TypeSafe AI
Latent Space · 21 sept. 2026

[AINews] Meta Muse Wonder & Wonder Full: MSL’s Claude 5.5-tier Frontier Model
Latent Space · 13 oct. 2026

[AINews] The Future of Latent Space
Latent Space · 25 sept. 2026

[AINews] Opus 5.5 is good at explainer videos
Latent Space · 29 sept. 2026