# GridVQA-X: A Framework for Evaluating Multimodal Explainability Methods

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2606.14740 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.14740/

## 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 20 of its 33 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 2 Jun 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, 20 of 20)

- [Shortcut Learning in Deep Neural Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2004.07780/) (2020)
- [LLaVA-Med: Training a Large Language-and-Vision Assistant for Biomedicine in One Day](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.00890/) (2023)
- [MDETR -- Modulated Detection for End-to-End Multi-Modal Understanding](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2104.12763/) (2021)
- [When and why vision-language models behave like bags-of-words, and what to do about it?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.01936/) (2022)
- [From Anecdotal Evidence to Quantitative Evaluation Methods: A Systematic Review on Evaluating Explainable AI](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2201.08164/) (2022)
- [Right for the Right Reasons: Training Differentiable Models by Constraining their Explanations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1703.03717/) (2017)
- [Ground Truth Evaluation of Neural Network Explanations with CLEVR-XAI](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2003.07258/) (2020)
- [OpenXAI: Towards a Transparent Evaluation of Model Explanations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2206.11104/) (2022)
- [Cross-modal Information Flow in Multimodal Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2411.18620/) (2024)
- [Does my multimodal model learn cross-modal interactions? It's harder to tell than you might think!](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2010.06572/) (2020)
- [The Clever Hans Mirage: A Comprehensive Survey on Spurious Correlations in Machine Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.12715/) (2024)
- [DIME: Fine-grained Interpretations of Multimodal Models via Disentangled Local Explanations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.02013/) (2022)
- [Language Prior Is Not the Only Shortcut: A Benchmark for Shortcut Learning in VQA](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.04692/) (2022)
- [Multimodal Explainable Artificial Intelligence: A Comprehensive Review of Methodological Advances and Future Research Directions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.05731/) (2023)
- [Navigating the Maze of Explainable AI: A Systematic Approach to Evaluating Methods and Metrics](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2409.16756/) (2024)
- [Measuring Cross-Modal Interactions in Multimodal Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.15828/) (2024)
- [Attention, Please! PixelSHAP Reveals What Vision-Language Models Actually Focus On](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.06670/) (2025)
- [MultiSHAP: A Shapley-Based Framework for Explaining Cross-Modal Interactions in Multimodal AI Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2508.00576/) (2025)
- [Rethinking Explainability in the Era of Multimodal AI](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.13060/) (2025)
- [Introduction to Judea Pearl's Do-Calculus](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1305.5506/) (2013)

## Abstract (arXiv)

With the increasing development of Vision-Language Models, it becomes imperative that their predictions are readily explainable to relevant stakeholders. However, the field of explainability has not kept pace with the multimodal surge. While recent Multimodal Explainable AI (MxAI) methods generate explanations to attribute the interaction between different modalities, current evaluation protocols lack the ground truth required to distinguish between true cross-modal reasoning (e.g., spatial composition) and shallow cross-modal shortcuts (e.g., Bag-of-Words attribute matching). It remains unknown whether MxAI methods faithfully capture synergistic interactions or merely hallucinate reasoning on models acting as simple feature detectors. In this paper, we introduce GridVQA-X, the first diagnostic framework specifically designed to evaluate cross-modal explainability. Unlike natural datasets, GridVQA-X leverages a closed-world synthesis logic to generate unique, mathematically guaranteed explanations. We utilize this controlled environment to train paired ground-truth models on identical architectures: Mpure, which learns robust spatial-relational reasoning and Mspur, which is structurally forced to rely on cross-modal shortcuts. This behavioral divergence creates a rigorous testbed: a faithful explainer must report distinct reasoning pathways for each model. Our findings reveal that widely used methods fail to distinguish between models relying on genuine spatial-relational reasoning and those exploiting cross-modal shortcuts, highlighting a critical gap in capturing true cross-modal synergy and misrepresenting how multimodal models actually make decisions.