PENDULUM: A Benchmark for Assessing Sycophancy in Multimodal Large Language Models
On the map: Multimodal LLMs / vision-language models → VLM benchmarks and visual reasoning
Abstract (arXiv)
Sycophancy, an excessive tendency of AI models to agree with user input at the expense of factual accuracy or in contradiction of visual evidence, poses a critical and underexplored challenge for multimodal large language models (MLLMs). While prior studies have examined this behavior in text-only settings of large language models, existing research on visual or multimodal counterparts remains limited in scope and depth of analysis. To address this gap, we introduce a comprehensive evaluation benchmark, textitPENDULUM, comprising approximately 2,000 human-curated Visual Question Answering pairs specifically designed to elicit sycophantic responses. The benchmark spans six distinct image domains of varying complexity, enabling a systematic investigation of how image type and inherent challenges influence sycophantic tendencies. Through extensive evaluation of state-of-the-art MLLMs. we observe substantial variability in model robustness and a pronounced susceptibility to sycophantic and hallucinatory behavior. Furthermore, we propose novel metrics to quantify sycophancy in visual reasoning, offering deeper insights into its manifestations across different multimodal contexts. Our findings highlight the urgent need for developing sycophancy-resilient architectures and training strategies to enhance factual consistency and reliability in future MLLMs. Our proposed dataset with MLLMs response are available at https://github.com/ashikiut/pendulum/.
Key facts. Cited by 4 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 26 of its 42 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 22 Dec 2025.
Builds on
26 of 42 references.
References · 26
- 2014Microsoft COCO: Common Objects in Contextcited by 17,608
- 2025Qwen2.5-VL Technical Reportcited by 5,587
- 2023Steering Llama 2 via Contrastive Activation Additioncited by 1,085
- 2023Towards Understanding Sycophancy in Language Modelscited by 1,040
- 2022Discovering Language Model Behaviors with Model-Written Evaluationscited by 836
- 2025Janus-Pro: Unified Multimodal Understanding and Generation with Data and Model Scalingcited by 812
- 2023A Comprehensive Overview of Large Language Modelscited by 648
- 2024Hallucination of Multimodal Large Language Models: A Surveycited by 388
- 2024A Survey on Hallucination in Large Vision-Language Modelscited by 357
- 2024Judging the Judges: Evaluating Alignment and Vulnerabilities in LLMs-as-Judgescited by 205
- 2023Simple synthetic data reduces sycophancy in large language modelscited by 187
- 2020NWPU-Crowd: A Large-Scale Benchmark for Crowd Counting and Localizationcited by 151
14 more
- 2025SycEval: Evaluating LLM Sycophancycited by 108
- 2024Sycophancy in Large Language Models: Causes and Mitigationscited by 101
- 2023Are You Sure? Challenging LLMs Leads to Performance Drops in The FlipFlop Experimentcited by 77
- 2024Can multiple-choice questions really be useful in detecting the abilities of LLMs?cited by 69
- 2024From Yes-Men to Truth-Tellers: Addressing Sycophancy in Large Language Models with Pinpoint Tuningcited by 54
- 2024An Empirical Analysis on Spatial Reasoning Capabilities of Large Multimodal Modelscited by 50
- 2024How Easy is It to Fool Your Multimodal LLMs? An Empirical Analysis on Deceptive Promptscited by 47
- 2024Steering Without Side Effects: Improving Post-Deployment Control of Language Modelscited by 46
- 2024Confabulation: The Surprising Value of Large Language Model Hallucinationscited by 43
- 2024LLMs May Perform MCQA by Selecting the Least Incorrect Optioncited by 33
- 2024Linear Probe Penalties Reduce LLM Sycophancycited by 28
- 2024Have the VLMs Lost Confidence? A Study of Sycophancy in VLMscited by 15
- 2024Mitigating Sycophancy in Decoder-Only Transformer Architectures: Synthetic Data Interventioncited by 5
- 2025Can LLMs Detect Their Confabulations? Estimating Reliability in Uncertainty-Aware Language Modelscited by 5
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 4.
4 papers.
- 2026Moral Sycophancy in Vision Language Modelscited by 3
- 2026Are You Sure You're Sure? Two Confounds in a Sycophancy Benchmarkcited by 1
- 2026When Helpfulness Becomes Sycophancy: Sycophancy is a Boundary Failure Between Social Alignment and Epistemic Integrity in Large Language Modelscited by 0
- 2026Agents Don't Just Agree, They Remember: Benchmarking Persistent Sycophancy in Self-Improving Personal Agentscited by 0
- 2026Are You Sure You're Sure? Two Confounds in a Sycophancy Benchmark26 Sep 2026
- 2026Agents Don't Just Agree, They Remember: Benchmarking Persistent Sycophancy in Self-Improving Personal Agents12 Jul 2026
- 2026When Helpfulness Becomes Sycophancy: Sycophancy is a Boundary Failure Between Social Alignment and Epistemic Integrity in Large Language Models6 May 2026
- 2026Moral Sycophancy in Vision Language Models9 Feb 2026
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026Looking Again: Measuring Sycophancy in the Reasoning Chains of Multimodal Models Under Pressure
- 2025Pointing to a Llama and Call it a Camel: On the Sycophancy of Multimodal Large Language Models
- 2024Sycophancy in Vision-Language Models: A Systematic Analysis and an Inference-Time Mitigation Framework
- 2025Flattery in Motion: Benchmarking and Analyzing Sycophancy in Video-LLMs
- 2024Mementos: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Multimodal Large Language Model Reasoning over Image Sequences
- 2025All-in-one: Understanding and Generation in Multimodal Reasoning with the MAIA Benchmark
- 2026SycoPhantasy: Quantifying Sycophancy and Hallucination in Small Open Weight VLMs for Vision-Language Scoring of Fantasy Characters
- 2025Beyond the Visible: Benchmarking Occlusion Perception in Multimodal Large Language Models