The Expense of Seeing: Attaining Trustworthy Multimodal Reasoning Within the Monolithic Paradigm
Summary
This paper challenges the assumption that current Vision-Language Models faithfully synthesize multimodal data, proposing an information-theoretic Modality Translation Protocol with new metrics (Toll, Curse, Fallacy of Seeing) to evaluate trustworthiness over traditional multimodal gain.
View Cached Full Text
Cached at: 05/25/26, 06:36 AM
Paper page - The Expense of Seeing: Attaining Trustworthy Multimodal Reasoning Within the Monolithic Paradigm
Source: https://huggingface.co/papers/2604.20665
Abstract
Vision-Language Models often fail to faithfully synthesize multimodal data due to reliance on language priors over visual representation, necessitating new evaluation frameworks that prioritize semantic sufficiency over traditional multimodal gain metrics.
The rapid proliferation ofVision-Language Models(VLMs) is often framed as enabling unified multimodal knowledge discovery but rests on an under-examined assumption: that current VLMs faithfully synthesise multimodal data. We argue they often do not, and this gap reflects a trustworthiness problem in the dominantVision Encoder-Projector-LLM paradigm. Rather than extracting grounded knowledge from visual inputs, state-of-the-art models frequently exhibitfunctional blindness, i.e., exploiting strong language priors to bypass severe visual representation bottlenecks. In this work, we challenge the conventional methodology ofmultimodal evaluation, which relies on data ablation or new dataset creation and therefore conflates dataset biases with architectural incapacity. We propose an information-theoretic departure: theModality Translation Protocol, designed to quantify what we call theExpense of Seeing. By translating semantic payloads rather than ablating them, we formulate three novel metrics -- theToll (ToS),Curse (CoS), andFallacy (FoS)of Seeing -- culminating in theSemantic Sufficiency Criterion (SSC). Furthermore, we hypothesise aDivergence Law of Multimodal Scaling: as the underlying language engines scale to unprecedented reasoning capabilities, the penalty of the visual knowledge bottleneck may increase rather than diminish. We argue the community should move beyond “multimodal gain” as a primary evaluation target. By elevating the SSC from a passive diagnostic constraint to an active architectural blueprint, we provide a foundation for guiding the next generation of AI systems toward genuine multimodal reasoning.
View arXiv pageView PDFAdd to collection
Get this paper in your agent:
hf papers read 2604\.20665
Don’t have the latest CLI?curl \-LsSf https://hf\.co/cli/install\.sh \| bash
Models citing this paper0
No model linking this paper
Cite arxiv.org/abs/2604.20665 in a model README.md to link it from this page.
Datasets citing this paper0
No dataset linking this paper
Cite arxiv.org/abs/2604.20665 in a dataset README.md to link it from this page.
Spaces citing this paper0
No Space linking this paper
Cite arxiv.org/abs/2604.20665 in a Space README.md to link it from this page.
Collections including this paper0
No Collection including this paper
Add this paper to acollectionto link it from this page.
Similar Articles
Do Vision-Language Models Truly Perform Vision Reasoning? A Rigorous Study of the Modality Gap
This paper introduces CrossMath, a controlled multimodal reasoning benchmark that reveals a critical limitation in current vision-language models: they perform reasoning primarily in textual space rather than genuine vision-grounded reasoning, with visual input often degrading performance compared to text-only baselines. The authors propose fine-tuning approaches to mitigate this modality gap and improve multimodal reasoning capabilities.
Bad Seeing or Bad Thinking? Rewarding Perception for Vision-Language Reasoning
This paper introduces a reinforcement learning framework that improves perception-reasoning synergy in vision-language models by explicitly rewarding perceptual fidelity, using a 'blindfolded reasoning' proxy and structured verbal verification to address ambiguity in modality credit assignment.
More Thought, Less Accuracy? On the Dual Nature of Reasoning in Vision-Language Models
This paper uncovers that prolonged reasoning in vision-language models can impair perceptual grounding, causing recognition failures on basic visual questions. It proposes Vision-Anchored Policy Optimization (VAPO) to steer reasoning toward visually grounded trajectories, achieving state-of-the-art performance with the VAPO-Thinker-7B model.
When Vision Speaks for Sound
This paper identifies that video-capable multimodal LLMs often appear to understand audio but actually rely on visual cues, a failure mode termed the audio-visual Clever Hans effect. It introduces Thud, an intervention-driven probing framework to diagnose this issue, and proposes an alignment recipe that improves audio-visual consistency by 28 percentage points.
Improving Multimodal Reasoning via Worst Dimension Optimization
This paper introduces Multimodal Multi-Dimensional Scalarization Process Reward Modeling (MMS-PRM), which enforces the worst dimension's robustness in multimodal reasoning to prevent failures like visual hallucinations from being masked by strong text logic.