# When Should a VLM Look? Paying Only for Visual Calls That Were Needed and Used

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.22910 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.22910/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 42 of its 49 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 19 Sep 2026.

## Builds on (most cited first, 30 of 42)

- [Qwen2.5-VL Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.13923/) (2025)
- [GPT-4o System Card](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.21276/) (2024)
- [Gemini 2.5: Pushing the Frontier with Advanced Reasoning, Multimodality, Long Context, and Next Generation Agentic Capabilities](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.06261/) (2025)
- [Qwen3-VL Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2511.21631/) (2025)
- [InternVL3: Exploring Advanced Training and Test-Time Recipes for Open-Source Multimodal Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.10479/) (2025)
- [ChartQA: A Benchmark for Question Answering about Charts with Visual and Logical Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.10244/) (2022)
- [Language Models Don't Always Say What They Think: Unfaithful Explanations in Chain-of-Thought Prompting](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.04388/) (2023)
- [Are We on the Right Way for Evaluating Large Vision-Language Models?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.20330/) (2024)
- [BLINK: Multimodal Large Language Models Can See but Not Perceive](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.12390/) (2024)
- [Group-in-Group Policy Optimization for LLM Agent Training](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.10978/) (2025)
- [V*: Guided Visual Search as a Core Mechanism in Multimodal LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2312.14135/) (2023)
- [VLMEvalKit: An Open-Source Toolkit for Evaluating Large Multi-Modality Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.11691/) (2024)
- [DeepEyes: Incentivizing "Thinking with Images" via Reinforcement Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.14362/) (2025)
- [MME-RealWorld: Could Your Multimodal LLM Challenge High-Resolution Real-World Scenarios that are Difficult for Humans?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2408.13257/) (2024)
- [Direct and Indirect Effects](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1301.2300/) (2013)
- [Pixel Reasoner: Incentivizing Pixel-Space Reasoning with Curiosity-Driven Reinforcement Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.15966/) (2025)
- [Thyme: Think Beyond Images](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2508.11630/) (2025)
- [DeepEyesV2: Toward Agentic Multimodal Model](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2511.05271/) (2025)
- [Mini-o3: Scaling Up Reasoning Patterns and Interaction Turns for Visual Search](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.07969/) (2025)
- [VisualAgentBench: Towards Large Multimodal Models as Visual Foundation Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2408.06327/) (2024)
- [Adaptive Chain-of-Focus Reasoning via Dynamic Visual Search and Zooming for Efficient VLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.15436/) (2025)
- [VTool-R1: VLMs Learn to Think with Images via Reinforcement Learning on Multimodal Tool Use](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.19255/) (2025)
- [Information Gain-based Policy Optimization: A Simple and Effective Approach for Multi-Turn Search Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.14967/) (2025)
- [ACTIVE-o3: Empowering MLLMs with Active Perception via Pure Reinforcement Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.21457/) (2025)
- [CodeV: Code with Images for Faithful Visual Reasoning via Tool-Aware Policy Optimization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2511.19661/) (2025)
- [AdaTooler-V: Adaptive Tool-Use for Images and Videos](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2512.16918/) (2025)
- [On the Faithfulness of Visual Thinking: Measurement and Enhancement](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.23482/) (2025)
- [PyVision-RL: Forging Open Agentic Vision Models via RL](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.20739/) (2026)
- [TUMIX: Multi-Agent Test-Time Scaling with Tool-Use Mixture](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.01279/) (2025)
- [PACR: Progressively Ascending Confidence Reward for LLM Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.22255/) (2025)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Vision-language agents that crop and zoom are trained with rewards that credit a successful tool call, yet a successful call does not show that the model needed to look or used the pixels it received. On our cold-start checkpoint only 10% to 12% of visual calls were both needed and used, and released agents make spurious calls 36% to 87% of the time on individual benchmarks. Outcome rewards, judge rewards, and branch probes each observe one side of this failure, and about two thirds of what an outcome reward pays goes to calls that were neither needed nor used. CounterCredit asks both questions of every image-returning call at its realized pre-call state, using the policy's own gold-answer score. A decision value compares the realized visual branch with answering immediately; an evidence value compares the returned crop with random same-size patches substituted into the same call. A call verified on both earns cashback and every other executed call pays rent; the price is bounded so that every correct trajectory outranks every wrong one, and a dual-channel GRPO advantage keeps the price in its own units. From the same cold start, prompt pool, and budget, CounterCredit reaches 89.5% on V*, 80.2% on HR-Bench-4K, and 76.4% on HR-Bench-8K, 6.3 to 9.4 points above outcome-only GRPO at 1.78 against 1.84 calls per question, and lowers the spurious-call rate to 31% to 36%, the lowest among the agents evaluated. The same recipe lifts a Qwen3-VL-8B base from 75.4 to 80.8 on average.