# Ranking-Aware Calibration for Reliable Multimodal Reinforcement Learning

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2605.16999 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.16999/

## Key facts

- Cited by 1 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Multimodal reasoning, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning.
- Builds on 38 of its 47 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 16 May 2026.

## Placed in

- LLM reasoning / [Multimodal reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/lr/multimodal-reasoning/)
- Multimodal LLMs / vision-language models / [Embodied and 3D vision-language models](https://mlsanity.com/mllm/embodied-and-3d-vision-language-models/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 30 of 38)

- [Learning Transferable Visual Models From Natural Language Supervision](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2103.00020/) (2021)
- [Training language models to follow instructions with human feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.02155/) (2022)
- [Proximal Policy Optimization Algorithms](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1707.06347/) (2017)
- [Direct Preference Optimization: Your Language Model is Secretly a Reward Model](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.18290/) (2023)
- [Visual Instruction Tuning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.08485/) (2023)
- [DeepSeek-R1: Incentivizing Reasoning Capability in LLMs via Reinforcement Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.12948/) (2025)
- [BLIP-2: Bootstrapping Language-Image Pre-training with Frozen Image Encoders and Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2301.12597/) (2023)
- [On Calibration of Modern Neural Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1706.04599/) (2017)
- [Flamingo: a Visual Language Model for Few-Shot Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2204.14198/) (2022)
- [Benchmarking Neural Network Robustness to Common Corruptions and Perturbations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1903.12261/) (2019)
- [Supervised Contrastive Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2004.11362/) (2020)
- [MMMU: A Massive Multi-discipline Multimodal Understanding and Reasoning Benchmark for Expert AGI](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.16502/) (2023)
- [HybridFlow: A Flexible and Efficient RLHF Framework](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2409.19256/) (2024)
- [Learn to Explain: Multimodal Reasoning via Thought Chains for Science Question Answering](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2209.09513/) (2022)
- [Evaluating Object Hallucination in Large Vision-Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.10355/) (2023)
- [Can You Trust Your Model's Uncertainty? Evaluating Predictive Uncertainty Under Dataset Shift](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1906.02530/) (2019)
- [Can LLMs Express Their Uncertainty? An Empirical Evaluation of Confidence Elicitation in LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.13063/) (2023)
- [Semantic Uncertainty: Linguistic Invariances for Uncertainty Estimation in Natural Language Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.09664/) (2023)
- [Just Ask for Calibration: Strategies for Eliciting Calibrated Confidence Scores from Language Models Fine-Tuned with Human Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.14975/) (2023)
- [Vision-R1: Incentivizing Reasoning Capability in Multimodal Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.06749/) (2025)
- [MathVerse: Does Your Multi-modal LLM Truly See the Diagrams in Visual Math Problems?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.14624/) (2024)
- [Measuring Multimodal Mathematical Reasoning with MATH-Vision Dataset](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.14804/) (2024)
- [Revisiting the Calibration of Modern Neural Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2106.07998/) (2021)
- [Inter-GPS: Interpretable Geometry Problem Solving with Formal Language and Symbolic Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2105.04165/) (2021)
- [Calibration of Pre-trained Transformers](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2003.07892/) (2020)
- [We-Math: Does Your Large Multimodal Model Achieve Human-like Mathematical Reasoning?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.01284/) (2024)
- [Enhancing the Reasoning Ability of Multimodal Large Language Models via Mixed Preference Optimization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2411.10442/) (2024)
- [M3CoT: A Novel Benchmark for Multi-Domain Multi-step Multi-modal Chain-of-Thought](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.16473/) (2024)
- [Beyond Binary Rewards: Training LMs to Reason About Their Uncertainty](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.16806/) (2025)
- [Multi-Object Hallucination in Vision-Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.06192/) (2024)

## Built on by (most cited first, 1 of 1)

- [Separating Capability from Confidence: Grounded Dual-State Calibration for GRPO-Trained Medical Vision-Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.06419/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Reinforcement learning post-training has substantially improved the reasoning accuracy of vision-language models, yet the resulting policies remain poorly calibrated. Terminal correctness rewards provide no gradient that penalizes confident errors more than uncertain ones and no signal that ties confidence to the quality of visual evidence, a gap that becomes especially severe under corrupted or ambiguous inputs where models continue to report high confidence on incorrect answers. We introduce Ranking-Aware Calibration (RAC), a training-time framework that supervises confidence using two comparison signals that group-based RL already produces at no additional labeling cost. The ranking-aware group loss enforces that a better rollout receives higher confidence than a worse one within the same prompt. The clean--corrupted pairwise loss enforces that confidence attenuates as visual evidence degrades. Because the ranking signal forces the policy to distinguish between correct and incorrect reasoning paths, it also reinforces task accuracy beyond what correctness rewards alone produce. Both losses require no external confidence annotations and integrate naturally with group-based RL post-training. We instantiate RAC on Qwen2.5-VL and InternVL-3.5 backbones and evaluate on six multimodal reasoning benchmarks under clean and corrupted inputs. Empirical results show that the ranking-aware loss substantially improves task accuracy by teaching the policy to discriminate between better and worse reasoning, while the pairwise corruption loss reduces calibration error under degraded inputs. Their combination achieves the best calibration across all tested backbones while improving accuracy in the majority of settings.