DeFacto: Counterfactual Thinking with Images for Enforcing Evidence-Grounded and Faithful Reasoning

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2509.20912v1
• Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2025 08:58:10 GMT
• Title: DeFacto: Counterfactual Thinking with Images for Enforcing Evidence-Grounded and Faithful Reasoning
• Abstract summary: DeFacto is a counterfactual reasoning framework that jointly enforces accurate answering and faithful reasoning.<n>We develop a pipeline that automatically localizes question-relevant evidence and constructs positive, counterfactual, and random variants.<n> Experiments on diverse benchmarks demonstrate that DeFacto substantially improves both answer accuracy and reasoning faithfulness.
• Score: 11.952788515297913
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Recent advances in multimodal language models (MLLMs) have achieved remarkable progress in vision-language reasoning, especially with the emergence of "thinking with images," which integrates explicit visual steps into the reasoning process. While this paradigm strengthens image-based reasoning, a significant challenge remains: models may arrive at correct answers by relying on irrelevant or spurious regions, driven by prior knowledge or dataset biases. Even when the answer is correct, flawed reasoning indicates that the model has not truly understood the image, highlighting the critical importance of reasoning fidelity in multimodal tasks. To address this issue, we propose DeFacto, a counterfactual reasoning framework that jointly enforces accurate answering and faithful reasoning. A key component of our approach is the design of three complementary training paradigms: (i) positive, (ii) counterfactual, and (iii) random-masking. To enable these paradigms, we develop a pipeline that automatically localizes question-relevant evidence and constructs positive, counterfactual, and random variants, resulting in a dataset of about 100k images. Building on this framework, we train multimodal language models with GRPO-based reinforcement learning, where we design three complementary rewards to guide the model toward accurate answering and evidence-grounded reasoning. Experiments on diverse benchmarks demonstrate that DeFacto substantially improves both answer accuracy and reasoning faithfulness, establishing a stronger foundation for interpretable multimodal reasoning. The code is available on GitHub and the dataset is released on HuggingFace.

Related papers

• Look on Demand: A Cognitive Scheduling Framework for Visual Evidence Acquisition in Multimodal Reasoning [82.86343313807158]
  We argue that a central challenge is how and when visual evidence is introduced into the reasoning process.<n>Motivated by this insight, we propose CSMR, a multimodal reasoning framework in which a language model controls the reasoning process.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-27T08:43:13Z)
• Can Unified Generation and Understanding Models Maintain Semantic Equivalence Across Different Output Modalities? [61.533560295383786]
  Unified Multimodal Large Language Models (U-MLLMs) integrate understanding and generation within a single architecture.<n>We observe that U-MLLMs fail to maintain semantic equivalence when required to render the same results in the image modality.<n>We introduce VGUBench, a framework to decouple reasoning logic from generation fidelity.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-27T06:23:56Z)
• See It, Say It, Sorted: An Iterative Training-Free Framework for Visually-Grounded Multimodal Reasoning in LVLMs [24.90876091319589]
  We present an iterative, training-free, plug-and-play framework for visually-grounded multimodal reasoning.<n>Our key idea is to supervise each reasoning step at test time with visual evidence.<n>Our method achieves 16.5%-29.5% improvements on TreeBench and 13.7% RH-AUC gains on RH-Bench.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-25T02:13:59Z)
• Analyzing Reasoning Consistency in Large Multimodal Models under Cross-Modal Conflicts [74.47786985522762]
  We identify a critical failure mode termed textual inertia, where models tend to blindly adhere to the erroneous text while neglecting conflicting visual evidence.<n>We propose the LogicGraph Perturbation Protocol that structurally injects perturbations into the reasoning chains of diverse LMMs.<n>Results reveal that models successfully self-correct in less than 10% of cases and predominantly succumb to blind textual error propagation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-07T16:39:34Z)
• Deep But Reliable: Advancing Multi-turn Reasoning for Thinking with Images [53.373427633330515]
  We propose DRIM, a model that enables deep but reliable multi-turn reasoning when thinking with images in its multimodal CoT.<n>Based on a high-resolution image dataset, we construct high-difficulty and verifiable visual question-answer pairs.<n>In the SFT stage, we collect tool trajectories as cold-start data, guiding a multi-turn reasoning pattern.<n>In the RL stage, we introduce redundancy-penalized policy optimization, which incentivizes the model to develop a self-reflective reasoning pattern.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-19T07:44:43Z)
• ROVER: Benchmarking Reciprocal Cross-Modal Reasoning for Omnimodal Generation [79.17352367219736]
  ROVER tests the use of one modality to guide, verify, or refine outputs in the other.<n>ROVER is a human-annotated benchmark that explicitly targets reciprocal cross-modal reasoning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-03T02:27:46Z)
• ThinkFake: Reasoning in Multimodal Large Language Models for AI-Generated Image Detection [51.93101033997245]
  Increasing realism of AI-generated images has raised serious concerns about misinformation and privacy violations.<n>We propose ThinkFake, a novel reasoning-based and generalizable framework for AI-generated image detection.<n>We show that ThinkFake outperforms state-of-the-art methods on the GenImage benchmark and demonstrates strong zero-shot generalization on the challenging LOKI benchmark.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-24T07:34:09Z)
• Unveiling Chain of Step Reasoning for Vision-Language Models with Fine-grained Rewards [48.55501117313608]
  We present chain of step reasoning for vision-language models, enabling assessing reasoning step quality accurately.<n>We present a simple, effective, and fully transparent framework, including the step-level reasoning data, process reward model (PRM), and reinforcement learning training.<n>We believe this paper serves as a baseline for vision-language models and offers insights into more complex multimodal reasoning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-23T13:47:32Z)
• A Survey on Latent Reasoning [100.54120559169735]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated impressive reasoning capabilities.<n>CoT reasoning that verbalizes intermediate steps limits the model's expressive bandwidth.<n>Latent reasoning tackles this bottleneck by performing multi-step inference entirely in the model's continuous hidden state.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-08T17:29:07Z)
• A Closer Look at Bias and Chain-of-Thought Faithfulness of Large (Vision) Language Models [53.18562650350898]
  Chain-of-thought (CoT) reasoning enhances performance of large language models.<n>We present the first comprehensive study of CoT faithfulness in large vision-language models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-29T18:55:05Z)
• ImageScope: Unifying Language-Guided Image Retrieval via Large Multimodal Model Collective Reasoning [62.61187785810336]
  ImageScope is a training-free, three-stage framework that unifies language-guided image retrieval tasks.<n>In the first stage, we improve the robustness of the framework by synthesizing search intents across varying levels of semantic granularity.<n>In the second and third stages, we reflect on retrieval results by verifying predicate propositions locally, and performing pairwise evaluations globally.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-13T08:43:24Z)
• BRAINTEASER: Lateral Thinking Puzzles for Large Language Models [15.95314613982879]
  BRAINTEASER is a multiple-choice Question Answering task designed to test the model's ability to exhibit lateral thinking. Our experiments with state-of-the-art instruction- and commonsense language models reveal a significant gap between human and model performance. We make all of our code and data available to stimulate work on developing and evaluating lateral thinking models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-08T07:46:01Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.