CVT-Bench: Probing Spatial-State Integrity through Counterfactual Viewpoint Transformations
On the map: Multimodal LLMs / vision-language models → Embodied and 3D vision-language models
Abstract (arXiv)
Multimodal large language models (MLLMs) perform strongly on isolated spatial tasks, but whether their predictions remain persistent and mutually coherent across viewpoints and competing scenes is unclear. We formalize this behavioral property as spatial-state integrity and introduce CVT-Bench, a factorial diagnostic suite spanning two domains (CVT-Synthetic, CVT-Real), four context regimes (CVT-Isolated, irrelevant filler, attribute filler, CVT-Competing), three representations (Image, Text/BBox, Scene Graph), and ten viewpoint conditions (nine azimuths from 0^circ to 360^circ at 45^circ increments, plus Top) with target views withheld. Across 200 scenes and 11,833 relational queries, we measure counterfactual accuracy, cycle consistency, the normalized survival coefficient, spatial realizability, and context-specific interference. Five state-of-the-art MLLMs exhibit rapid persistence loss and frequently produce jointly unrealizable states despite high local accuracy, with failures amplified by competing contexts and natural-scene complexity. Matched irrelevant and attribute filler controls show that prompt length, position, or loss of scene access alone are insufficient explanations. On average, Text/BBox improves accuracy, persistence, and realizability, while Scene Graph provides complementary gains; neither eliminates the instability. Thus, isolated spatial accuracy substantially overestimates robustness, establishing spatial-state integrity as a distinct evaluation target. The complete benchmark and codebase will be publicly released.
Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Embodied and 3D vision-language models, one of 16 directions in Multimodal LLMs / vision-language models. Builds on 20 of its 27 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 22 Mar 2026.
Builds on
20 of 27 references.
Closest ancestors · 6
Same direction, newest first
- 2025SpatialBench: Benchmarking Multimodal Large Language Models for Spatial Cognition26 Nov
- 2025SpinBench: Perspective and Rotation as a Lens on Spatial Reasoning in VLMs29 Sep
- 2025LRR-Bench: Left, Right or Rotate? Vision-Language models Still Struggle With Spatial Understanding Tasks27 Jul
- 2025MindCube: Spatial Mental Modeling from Limited Views26 Jun
- 2025Struct2D: A Perception-Guided Framework for Spatial Reasoning in MLLMs4 Jun
- 2024SpatialVLM: Endowing Vision-Language Models with Spatial Reasoning Capabilities22 Jan
Other references · 14
- 2024Qwen2-VL: Enhancing Vision-Language Model's Perception of the World at Any Resolutioncited by 4,234
- 2023Lost in the Middle: How Language Models Use Long Contextscited by 3,455
- 2015VQA: Visual Question Answeringcited by 2,506
- 2016CLEVR: A Diagnostic Dataset for Compositional Language and Elementary Visual Reasoningcited by 1,457
- 2023LongBench: A Bilingual, Multitask Benchmark for Long Context Understandingcited by 1,417
- 2024RULER: What's the Real Context Size of Your Long-Context Language Models?cited by 1,346
- 2024Eyes Wide Shut? Exploring the Visual Shortcomings of Multimodal LLMscited by 735
- 2022Winoground: Probing Vision and Language Models for Visio-Linguistic Compositionalitycited by 529
- 2023L-Eval: Instituting Standardized Evaluation for Long Context Language Modelscited by 233
- 2020Learning 3D Semantic Scene Graphs from 3D Indoor Reconstructionscited by 208
- 2024MuirBench: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Robust Multi-image Understandingcited by 188
- 2025LLaVA-ST: A Multimodal Large Language Model for Fine-Grained Spatial-Temporal Understandingcited by 59
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 2.
2 papers.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026Seeing, Saying, but Not Using: From Reportable Spatial Facts to Usable States in Multimodal Large Language Models
- 2026Multimodal Language Models Cannot Spot Spatial Inconsistencies
- 2026GraFT: A Training-Free Framework for Spatial Reasoning in Multimodal Large Language Models via 3D Scene Graphs
- 2025RCI: A Score for Evaluating Global and Local Reasoning in Multimodal Benchmarks
- 2026See2Think: Do Multimodal Models Really Use Intermediate Visual States?
- 2026Seeing vs. Believing: Evaluating the Language Bias of Open-Source MLLMs in Counter-Intuitive Scenes
- 2026MindEdit-Bench: Benchmarking Object-Level Counterfactual Spatial Reasoning in VLMs from In-the-Wild Photos
- 2024REVISION: Rendering Tools Enable Spatial Fidelity in Vision-Language Models