mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

How Well Do LLMs Reason with Noisy Evidence? An Active Visual Reasoning Benchmark

arXiv 2610.07751 ↗First posted 6 Oct 2026cs.AIcited by 0

On the map: LLM reasoning → Multimodal reasoning also fits: Reasoning benchmarks and evaluation

Abstract (arXiv)

Real-world reasoning rarely reduces to static question answering: agents must actively gather information from tools and sensors that are often noisy and unreliable. Yet most existing active reasoning benchmarks assume that environmental feedback is trustworthy, or introduce noise without exposing an explicit, calibrated uncertainty signal, leaving open how LLMs should reason when the evidence itself is uncertain. We introduce VisualNoiseQA, a novel benchmark for active reasoning under noisy visual feedback. A text-only LLM must solve VQA problems by iteratively querying a fixed, off-the-shelf VLM treated as a stochastic visual sensor. For each query, we draw multiple samples and expose an empirical uncertainty signal via self-consistency, enabling the reasoner to probe from different angles and decide what to ask next and when to stop. Our construction is automatic and scalable: starting from diverse VQA sources and two noisy VLMs, we retain only questions where the sensor is inconsistent yet human-solvable. We evaluate multiple LLM reasoners on 1,000 instances spanning perception, chart understanding, and knowledge-intensive reasoning. VisualNoiseQA thus provides a controlled playground to study how different LLMs exploit uncertainty signals for robust reasoning.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Multimodal reasoning, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning. First posted on arXiv 6 Oct 2026.

Builds on

No reference list yet.

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2025ReasonBENCH: Benchmarking the (In)Stability of LLM Reasoning
  2. 2026Can We Trust LLM's Logic? Quantifying Uncertainty, Coherence, and Robustness via a Graph-Based Framework
  3. 2026The Cost of Reasoning: Chain-of-Thought Induces Overconfidence in Vision-Language Models
  4. 2025A Survey of Frontiers in LLM Reasoning: Inference Scaling, Learning to Reason, and Agentic Systems
  5. 2025From Passive to Active Reasoning: Can Large Language Models Ask the Right Questions under Incomplete Information?
  6. 2026Hob-VL: A Benchmark for Visually Grounded Boolean Reasoning
  7. 2025What Defines Good Reasoning in LLMs? Dissecting Reasoning Steps with Multi-Aspect Evaluation
  8. 2026Knowing When Not to Answer: Evaluating Abstention in Multimodal Reasoning Systems