Can VLMs Recall Factual Associations From Visual References?
On the map: Multimodal LLMs / vision-language models → VLM benchmarks and visual reasoning
Abstract (arXiv)
Through a controlled study, we identify a systematic deficiency in the multimodal grounding of Vision Language Models (VLMs). While VLMs can recall factual associations when provided a textual reference to an entity; their ability to do so is significantly diminished when the reference is visual instead. Forcing VLMs to rely on image representations of an entity halves their ability to recall factual knowledge, suggesting that VLMs struggle to link their internal knowledge of an entity with its image representation. We show that such linking failures are correlated with the expression of distinct patterns in model internal states, and that probes on these internal states achieve over 92% accuracy at flagging cases where the VLM response is unreliable. These probes can be applied, without retraining, to identify when a VLM will fail to correctly answer a question that requires an understanding of multimodal input. When used to facilitate selective prediction on a visual question answering task, the probes increase coverage by 7.87% (absolute) while also reducing the risk of error by 0.9% (absolute). Addressing the systematic, detectable deficiency is an important avenue in language grounding, and we provide informed recommendations for future directions.
Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in VLM benchmarks and visual reasoning, one of 16 directions in Multimodal LLMs / vision-language models. Builds on 24 of its 63 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 22 Aug 2025.
Builds on
24 of 63 references.
Closest ancestors · 2
Same direction, newest first
- 2024Selective "Selective Prediction": Reducing Unnecessary Abstention in Vision-Language Reasoning23 Feb
- 2023Vision-Language Models for Vision Tasks: A Survey3 Apr
Other references · 22
- 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,419
- 2024The Llama 3 Herd of Modelscited by 14,715
- 2021On the Opportunities and Risks of Foundation Modelscited by 4,033
- 2022Training Compute-Optimal Large Language Modelscited by 3,019
- 2022Locating and Editing Factual Associations in GPTcited by 2,691
- 2016Making the V in VQA Matter: Elevating the Role of Image Understanding in Visual Question Answeringcited by 2,516
- 2015VQA: Visual Question Answeringcited by 2,506
- 2019Language Models as Knowledge Bases?cited by 1,936
- 2016Understanding intermediate layers using linear classifier probescited by 1,353
- 2020Transformer Feed-Forward Layers Are Key-Value Memoriescited by 1,336
- 2019OK-VQA: A Visual Question Answering Benchmark Requiring External Knowledgecited by 1,121
- 2023Steering Llama 2 via Contrastive Activation Additioncited by 1,085
10 more
- 2024Eyes Wide Shut? Exploring the Visual Shortcomings of Multimodal LLMscited by 735
- 2018From Recognition to Cognition: Visual Commonsense Reasoningcited by 556
- 2020Google Landmarks Dataset v2 -- A Large-Scale Benchmark for Instance-Level Recognition and Retrievalcited by 309
- 2023Multimodal Foundation Models: From Specialists to General-Purpose Assistantscited by 247
- 2020Experience Grounds Languagecited by 242
- 2024Confidence Under the Hood: An Investigation into the Confidence-Probability Alignment in Large Language Modelscited by 34
- 2024Do Vision & Language Decoders use Images and Text equally? How Self-consistent are their Explanations?cited by 24
- 2025MMDT: Decoding the Trustworthiness and Safety of Multimodal Foundation Modelscited by 14
- 2025Language Models Can Predict Their Own Behaviorcited by 8
- 2023Leverage Points in Modality Shifts: Comparing Language-only and Multimodal Word Representationscited by 4
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 3.
3 papers.
- 2026Revealing the Impact of Visual Text Style on Attribute-based Descriptions Produced by Large Visual Language Modelscited by 1
- 2026Jako Tako or Fluent? Presenting PoVisLE: A Polish Vision-Language Evaluationcited by 1
- 2026Decodable but Misrouted: Sparse Features Uncover a Readout Gap in Vision-Language Models for Harmful Meme Detectioncited by 0
- 2026Decodable but Misrouted: Sparse Features Uncover a Readout Gap in Vision-Language Models for Harmful Meme Detection16 Sep 2026
- 2026Jako Tako or Fluent? Presenting PoVisLE: A Polish Vision-Language Evaluation7 Aug 2026
- 2026Revealing the Impact of Visual Text Style on Attribute-based Descriptions Produced by Large Visual Language Models30 Apr 2026
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2025Too Late to Recall: Explaining the Two-Hop Problem in Multimodal Knowledge Retrieval
- 2026Benchmarking Deflection and Hallucination in Large Vision-Language Models
- 2025Seeing but Not Believing: Probing the Disconnect Between Visual Attention and Answer Correctness in VLMs
- 2025Mixed Signals: Decoding VLMs' Reasoning and Underlying Bias in Vision-Language Conflict
- 2025MLLMs Know Where to Look: Training-free Perception of Small Visual Details with Multimodal LLMs
- 2026Failing to See or Failing to Know? Attributing Errors in Vision-Language Models
- 2026Seeing and Solving Are Not Enough for Vision-Language Models
- 2024FiVL: A Framework for Improved Vision-Language Alignment through the Lens of Training, Evaluation and Explainability