# More Than Meets the Eye: Measuring the Semiotic Gap in Vision-Language Models via Semantic Anchorage

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2604.17354 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2604.17354/

## 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 10 of its 44 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 19 Apr 2026.

## Placed in

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

## Builds on (most cited first, 10 of 10)

- [Qwen2.5-VL Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.13923/) (2025)
- [LLaVA-OneVision: Easy Visual Task Transfer](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2408.03326/) (2024)
- [Language Models (Mostly) Know What They Know](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2207.05221/) (2022)
- [InternVL3: Exploring Advanced Training and Test-Time Recipes for Open-Source Multimodal Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.10479/) (2025)
- [SigLIP 2: Multilingual Vision-Language Encoders with Improved Semantic Understanding, Localization, and Dense Features](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.14786/) (2025)
- [FLUX.1 Kontext: Flow Matching for In-Context Image Generation and Editing in Latent Space](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.15742/) (2025)
- [WISE: A World Knowledge-Informed Semantic Evaluation for Text-to-Image Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.07265/) (2025)
- [EVA-CLIP-18B: Scaling CLIP to 18 Billion Parameters](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.04252/) (2024)
- [On Verbalized Confidence Scores for LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.14737/) (2024)
- [T2I-ReasonBench: Benchmarking Reasoning-Informed Text-to-Image Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2508.17472/) (2025)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Vision-Language Models (VLMs) excel at photorealistic generation, yet often struggle to represent abstract meaning such as idiomatic interpretations of noun compounds. To study whether high visual fidelity interferes with idiomatic compositionality under visual abstraction, we introduce DIVA, a controlled benchmark that replaces high-fidelity visual detail with schematic iconicity by generating paired, sense-anchored visualizations for literal and idiomatic readings. We further propose Semantic Alignment Gap (Delta), an architecture-agnostic metric that quantifies divergence between literal and idiomatic visual grounding. We additionally introduce a directional signed bias b(t) to separately measure the direction and strength of literal preference. Evaluating 8 recent VLMs, we reveal a consistent Literal Superiority Bias: model scale alone does not resolve literal preference, and increased visual fidelity is associated with weaker symbolic alignment, suggesting cognitive interference from hyper-realistic imagery. Our findings suggest that improving compositional understanding requires iconographic abstraction of visual input and anchoring interpretation and generation in intended meaning.