# Relative Drawing Identification Complexity is Invariant to Modality in Vision-Language Models

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2505.10583 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.10583/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in VLM benchmarks and visual reasoning, one of 16 directions in Multimodal LLMs / vision-language models.
- Builds on 0 of its 36 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 14 May 2025.

## Placed in

- Multimodal LLMs / vision-language models / [VLM benchmarks and visual reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/mllm/vlm-benchmarks-and-visual-reasoning/)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Large language models have become multimodal, and many of them are said to integrate their modalities using common representations. If this were true, a drawing of a car as an image, for instance, should map to a similar area in the latent space as a textual description of the strokes that form the drawing. To explore this in a black-box access regime to these models, we propose the use of machine teaching, a theory that studies the minimal set of examples a teacher needs to choose so that the learner captures the concept. In this paper, we evaluate the complexity of teaching vision-language models a subset of objects in the Quick, Draw! dataset using two presentations: raw images as bitmaps and trace coordinates in TikZ format. The results indicate that image-based representations generally require fewer segments and achieve higher accuracy than coordinate-based representations. But, surprisingly, the teaching size usually ranks concepts similarly across both modalities, even when controlling for (a human proxy of) concept priors, suggesting that the simplicity of concepts may be an inherent property that transcends modality representations.