Does Visual Grounding Enhance the Understanding of Embodied Knowledge in Large Language Models?

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2510.16924v1
• Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2025 16:43:04 GMT
• Title: Does Visual Grounding Enhance the Understanding of Embodied Knowledge in Large Language Models?
• Authors: Zhihui Yang, Yupei Wang, Kaijie Mo, Zhe Zhao, Renfen Hu,
• Abstract summary: Vision-language models (VLMs) do not outperform text-only models in either task.<n>VLMs perform significantly worse in the visual dimension compared to other sensory dimensions.<n>Our findings underscore the need for more effective integration of embodied knowledge in multimodal language models.
• Score: 5.726418224480853
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Despite significant progress in multimodal language models (LMs), it remains unclear whether visual grounding enhances their understanding of embodied knowledge compared to text-only models. To address this question, we propose a novel embodied knowledge understanding benchmark based on the perceptual theory from psychology, encompassing visual, auditory, tactile, gustatory, olfactory external senses, and interoception. The benchmark assesses the models' perceptual abilities across different sensory modalities through vector comparison and question-answering tasks with over 1,700 questions. By comparing 30 state-of-the-art LMs, we surprisingly find that vision-language models (VLMs) do not outperform text-only models in either task. Moreover, the models perform significantly worse in the visual dimension compared to other sensory dimensions. Further analysis reveals that the vector representations are easily influenced by word form and frequency, and the models struggle to answer questions involving spatial perception and reasoning. Our findings underscore the need for more effective integration of embodied knowledge in LMs to enhance their understanding of the physical world.

Related papers

• Toward Cognitive Supersensing in Multimodal Large Language Model [67.15559571626747]
  We introduce Cognitive Supersensing, a training paradigm that endows MLLMs with human-like visual imagery capabilities.<n>In experiments, MLLMs trained with Cognitive Supersensing significantly outperform state-of-the-art baselines on CogSense-Bench.<n>We will open-source the CogSense-Bench and our model weights.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-02T02:19:50Z)
• Evaluating the encoding competence of visual language models using uncommon actions [5.816389980109022]
  UAIT is a new evaluation benchmark designed to test the semantic understanding ability of visual language models (VLMs) in uncommon-sense action scenes.<n>We synthesize high-quality uncommon-sense image-text samples using large language models, few-shot prompt engineering, and text-to-image generation.<n>We evaluate multiple state-of-the-art visual language models and compare them with models based on contrastive learning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-12T17:15:45Z)
• Retrieval-Based Interleaved Visual Chain-of-Thought in Real-World Driving Scenarios [69.00444996464662]
  We propose RIV-CoT, a Retrieval-Based Interleaved Visual Chain-of-Thought method that enables vision-language models to reason using visual crops corresponding to relevant entities.<n>Our experiments demonstrate that RIV-CoT improves answer accuracy by 3.1% and reasoning accuracy by 4.6% over vanilla CoT prompting.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-08T18:31:16Z)
• Explore the Hallucination on Low-level Perception for MLLMs [83.12180878559295]
  We aim to define and evaluate the self-awareness of MLLMs in low-level visual perception and understanding tasks. We present QL-Bench, a benchmark settings to simulate human responses to low-level vision. We demonstrate that while some models exhibit robust low-level visual capabilities, their self-awareness remains relatively underdeveloped.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-15T14:38:29Z)
• Is A Picture Worth A Thousand Words? Delving Into Spatial Reasoning for Vision Language Models [37.44286562901589]
  We propose SpatialEval, a novel benchmark that covers diverse aspects of spatial reasoning. We conduct a comprehensive evaluation of competitive language and vision-language models. Our findings reveal several counter-intuitive insights that have been overlooked in the literature.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-21T03:53:37Z)
• Training A Small Emotional Vision Language Model for Visual Art Comprehension [35.273057947865176]
  This paper develops small vision language models to understand visual art. It builds a small emotional vision language model (SEVLM) by emotion modeling and input-output feature alignment. It not only outperforms the state-of-the-art small models but is also competitive compared with LLaVA 7B after fine-tuning and GPT4(V)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-17T09:01:02Z)
• Exploring Spatial Schema Intuitions in Large Language and Vision Models [8.944921398608063]
  We investigate whether large language models (LLMs) effectively capture implicit human intuitions about building blocks of language. Surprisingly, correlations between model outputs and human responses emerge, revealing adaptability without a tangible connection to embodied experiences. This research contributes to a nuanced understanding of the interplay between language, spatial experiences, and computations made by large language models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-01T19:25:50Z)
• Visual Grounding Helps Learn Word Meanings in Low-Data Regimes [47.7950860342515]
  Modern neural language models (LMs) are powerful tools for modeling human sentence production and comprehension. But to achieve these results, LMs must be trained in distinctly un-human-like ways. Do models trained more naturalistically -- with grounded supervision -- exhibit more humanlike language learning? We investigate this question in the context of word learning, a key sub-task in language acquisition.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-20T03:33:36Z)
• See, Think, Confirm: Interactive Prompting Between Vision and Language Models for Knowledge-based Visual Reasoning [60.43585179885355]
  We propose a novel framework named Interactive Prompting Visual Reasoner (IPVR) for few-shot knowledge-based visual reasoning. IPVR contains three stages, see, think and confirm. We conduct experiments on a range of knowledge-based visual reasoning datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-01-12T18:59:50Z)
• Localization vs. Semantics: Visual Representations in Unimodal and Multimodal Models [57.08925810659545]
  We conduct a comparative analysis of the visual representations in existing vision-and-language models and vision-only models. Our empirical observations suggest that vision-and-language models are better at label prediction tasks. We hope our study sheds light on the role of language in visual learning, and serves as an empirical guide for various pretrained models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-12-01T05:00:18Z)
• Understanding ME? Multimodal Evaluation for Fine-grained Visual Commonsense [98.70218717851665]
  It is unclear whether the models really understand the visual scene and underlying commonsense knowledge due to limited evaluation data resources. We present a Multimodal Evaluation (ME) pipeline to automatically generate question-answer pairs to test models' understanding of the visual scene, text, and related knowledge. We then take a step further to show that training with the ME data boosts the model's performance in standard VCR evaluation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-10T21:44:33Z)
• Object-Centric Diagnosis of Visual Reasoning [118.36750454795428]
  This paper presents a systematical object-centric diagnosis of visual reasoning on grounding and robustness. We develop a diagnostic model, namely Graph Reasoning Machine. Our model replaces purely symbolic visual representation with probabilistic scene graph and then applies teacher-forcing training for the visual reasoning module.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-12-21T18:59:28Z)

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.