# Evaluation of Multilingual Ability to Use Spatial Deictic Expressions in Vision-Language Models

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2607.07251 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2607.07251/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Spatial and embodied reasoning, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning.
- Builds on 8 of its 18 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 8 Jul 2026.

## Placed in

- LLM reasoning / [Spatial and embodied reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/lr/spatial-and-embodied-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, 8 of 8)

- [Thinking in Space: How Multimodal Large Language Models See, Remember, and Recall Spaces](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.14171/) (2024)
- [PUB: A Pragmatics Understanding Benchmark for Assessing LLMs' Pragmatics Capabilities](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.07078/) (2024)
- [Do Vision-Language Models Represent Space and How? Evaluating Spatial Frame of Reference Under Ambiguities](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.17385/) (2024)
- [SPHERE: Unveiling Spatial Blind Spots in Vision-Language Models Through Hierarchical Evaluation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.12693/) (2024)
- [Spatial Reasoning in Multimodal Large Language Models: A Survey of Tasks, Benchmarks and Methods](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2511.15722/) (2025)
- [A Deixis-Centered Approach for Documenting Remote Synchronous Communication around Data Visualizations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2408.04041/) (2024)
- [Vision language models are unreliable at trivial spatial cognition](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.16061/) (2025)
- [PISA-Bench: The PISA Index as a Multilingual and Multimodal Metric for the Evaluation of Vision-Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.24792/) (2025)

## Abstract (arXiv)

One of the expected abilities of vision-language models (VLMs) is spatial reasoning ability based on a given text and image. To evaluate the spatial reasoning abilities of VLMs, we focus on the use of spatial deictic expressions, which are defined as spatial expressions whose referent is determined by their situational context, such as ``this'' and ``that''. To handle spatial deictic expressions, VLMs must jointly reason over language and visual space, grounding context-dependent references in the image's spatial structure. In addition, selecting appropriate spatial deictic expressions across languages requires VLMs to understand the language-specific spatial distinctions encoded by these expressions. In this paper, we develop a benchmark to evaluate the multilingual ability of VLMs to use spatial deictic expressions in four languages. Our experiments using this benchmark reveal that the tested models use demonstratives in a manner different from that of humans, particularly in selecting the appropriate demonstratives based on the distance to the object.