mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Do VLMs Have Bad Eyes? Diagnosing Compositional Failures via Mechanistic Interpretability

arXiv 2508.16652 ↗First posted 20 Aug 2025cs.CVcited by 4

On the map: Multimodal LLMs / vision-language models → Prompt learning and adaptation of CLIP

also in 1 more
Abstract (arXiv)

Vision-Language Models (VLMs) have shown remarkable performance in integrating visual and textual information for tasks such as image captioning and visual question answering. However, these models struggle with compositional generalization and object binding, which limit their ability to handle novel combinations of objects and their attributes. Our work explores the root causes of these failures using mechanistic interpretability techniques. We show evidence that individual neurons in the MLP layers of CLIP's vision encoder represent multiple features, and this "superposition" directly hinders its compositional feature representation which consequently affects compositional reasoning and object binding capabilities. We hope this study will serve as an initial step toward uncovering the mechanistic roots of compositional failures in VLMs. The code and supporting results can be found https://github.com/Mystic-Slice/Do-VLMs-Have-Bad-Eyes.

Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Prompt learning and adaptation of CLIP, one of 16 directions in Multimodal LLMs / vision-language models. Builds on 8 of its 19 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 20 Aug 2025.

Builds on

8 of 19 references.

References · 8

  1. 2016Grad-CAM: Visual Explanations from Deep Networks via Gradient-based Localizationcited by 6,733
  2. 2022Locating and Editing Factual Associations in GPTcited by 2,691
  3. 2020Transformer Feed-Forward Layers Are Key-Value Memoriescited by 1,336
  4. 2022Toy Models of Superpositioncited by 971
  5. 2023Vision Transformers Need Registerscited by 871
  6. 2023Interpreting CLIP's Image Representation via Text-Based Decompositioncited by 196
  7. 2024Understanding the Limits of Vision Language Models Through the Lens of the Binding Problemcited by 75
  8. 2024Quantifying and Enabling the Interpretability of CLIP-like Modelscited by 3

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 1; 2026: 3.

4 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026Diagnosing the Sources of Compositional Failure in Vision-Language Models: A Controlled Analysis
  2. 2026How Do VLMs Fail? Vision-Operation Misalignment in Compositional VQA
  3. 2024MMCOMPOSITION: Revisiting the Compositionality of Pre-trained Vision-Language Models
  4. 2025A Good CREPE needs more than just Sugar: Investigating Biases in Compositional Vision-Language Benchmarks
  5. 2024In-Context Learning Improves Compositional Understanding of Vision-Language Models
  6. 2024ConMe: Rethinking Evaluation of Compositional Reasoning for Modern VLMs
  7. 2022When and why vision-language models behave like bags-of-words, and what to do about it?
  8. 2023Contrasting Intra-Modal and Ranking Cross-Modal Hard Negatives to Enhance Visio-Linguistic Compositional Understanding