Can Unified Generation and Understanding Models Maintain Semantic Equivalence Across Different Output Modalities?

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2602.23711v1
• Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2026 06:23:56 GMT
• Title: Can Unified Generation and Understanding Models Maintain Semantic Equivalence Across Different Output Modalities?
• Authors: Hongbo Jiang, Jie Li, Yunhang Shen, Pingyang Dai, Xing Sun, Haoyu Cao, Liujuan Cao,
• Abstract summary: 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.
• Score: 61.533560295383786
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Unified Multimodal Large Language Models (U-MLLMs) integrate understanding and generation within a single architecture. However, existing evaluations typically assess these capabilities separately, overlooking semantic equivalence, i.e., the ability to manifest consistent reasoning results regardless of the output modality. In this work, we investigate whether current U-MLLMs satisfy this premise. We observe that while models demonstrate robust textual reasoning, they fail to maintain semantic equivalence when required to render the same results in the image modality. To rigorously diagnose this discrepancy, we introduce VGUBench, a framework to decouple reasoning logic from generation fidelity. VGUBench comprises three diagnostic tasks: (1)Textual Generative Understanding, establishing a baseline for reasoning accuracy in textual response; (2)Visual Generative Understanding, evaluating the ability to generate visual responses that represent the correct answer; and (3)a Visual Rendering control task, which assesses the ability to directly render explicit visual descriptions into images without complex reasoning. Our evaluation reveals a significant disparity: despite strong performance in textual understanding and visual rendering, U-MLLMs exhibit a marked performance collapse when required to generate visual answers to questions. Furthermore, we find a negligible correlation between visual answering performance and basic rendering quality. These results suggest that the failure stems not from insufficient generation fidelity, but from a breakdown in cross-modal semantic alignment. We provide diagnostic insights to address this challenge in future Unified Generation and Understanding Models.

Related papers

• Seeing Through Words: Controlling Visual Retrieval Quality with Language Models [68.49490036960559]
  We propose a new paradigm of quality-controllable retrieval, which enriches short queries with contextual details while incorporating explicit notions of image quality.<n>Our key idea is to leverage a generative language model as a query completion function, extending underspecified queries into descriptive forms.<n>Our proposed approach significantly improves retrieval results and provides effective quality control, bridging the gap between the expressive capacity of modern VLMs and the underspecified nature of short user queries.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-24T18:20:57Z)
• AMVICC: A Novel Benchmark for Cross-Modal Failure Mode Profiling for VLMs and IGMs [2.357397994148727]
  multimodal large language models (MLLMs) and image generation models (IGMs) were investigated.<n>We created a novel benchmark to compare failure modes across image-to-text and text-to-image tasks.<n>Our results show that failure modes are often shared between models and modalities, but certain failures are model-specific and modality-specific.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-20T00:06:58Z)
• 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)
• RealUnify: Do Unified Models Truly Benefit from Unification? A Comprehensive Benchmark [71.3555284685426]
  We introduce RealUnify, a benchmark designed to evaluate bidirectional capability synergy.<n>RealUnify comprises 1,000 meticulously human-annotated instances spanning 10 categories and 32 subtasks.<n>We find that current unified models still struggle to achieve effective synergy, indicating that architectural unification alone is insufficient.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-29T15:07:28Z)
• SUDER: Self-Improving Unified Large Multimodal Models for Understanding and Generation with Dual Self-Rewards [55.99492656542475]
  We propose textbfSUDER (textbfSelf-improving textbfUnified LMMs with textbfDual stextbfElf-textbfRewards), a framework reinforcing the understanding and generation capabilities of LMMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-09T17:38:45Z)
• Can MLLMs Guide Me Home? A Benchmark Study on Fine-Grained Visual Reasoning from Transit Maps [56.76175383189738]
  We introduce ReasonMap, a benchmark designed to assess the fine-grained visual understanding and spatial reasoning abilities of MLLMs.<n>ReasonMap encompasses high-resolution transit maps from 30 cities across 13 countries and includes 1,008 question-answer pairs spanning two question types and three templates.<n> Comprehensive evaluations of 15 popular MLLMs, including both base and reasoning variants, reveal a counterintuitive pattern.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-24T12:33:52Z)
• Treble Counterfactual VLMs: A Causal Approach to Hallucination [6.3952983618258665]
  VisionLanguage Models (VLMs) have advanced multi-modal tasks like image captioning, visual question answering, and reasoning.<n>They often generate hallucinated outputs inconsistent with the visual context or prompt.<n>Existing studies link hallucination to statistical biases, language priors, and biased feature learning but lack a structured causal understanding.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-08T11:13:05Z)
• A Cognitive Paradigm Approach to Probe the Perception-Reasoning Interface in VLMs [3.2228025627337864]
  This paper introduces a structured evaluation framework to dissect the perception-reasoning interface in Vision-Language Models (VLMs)<n>We propose three distinct evaluation paradigms, mirroring human problem-solving strategies.<n>Applying this framework, we demonstrate that CA, leveraging powerful language models for reasoning over rich, independently generated descriptions, achieves new state-of-the-art (SOTA) performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-23T12:42:42Z)
• NPHardEval4V: Dynamic Evaluation of Large Vision-Language Models with Effects of Vision [64.83085920775316]
  We introduce NPHardEval4V, a multimodal benchmark suite grounded in four classical NP-hard problems.<n>Each task is presented through a combination of structured visual layouts and textual prompts, designed to assess the ability of LVLMs to perform reasoning under visual-linguistic constraints.<n>Our results show that while these models perform reasonably well on perception-based inputs, they struggle with global optimization, abstraction, and constraint satisfaction.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-04T07:10:31Z)
• 3VL: Using Trees to Improve Vision-Language Models' Interpretability [40.678288227161936]
  Vision-Language models (VLMs) have proven to be effective at aligning image and text representations, producing superior zero-shot results when transferred to many downstream tasks.<n>These representations suffer from some key shortcomings in understanding Compositional Language Concepts (CLC), such as recognizing objects' attributes, states, and relations between different objects.<n>In this work, we introduce the architecture and training technique of Tree-augmented Vision-Language (3VL) model accompanied by our proposed Anchor inference method and Differential Relevance (DiRe) interpretability tool.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-28T20:26:03Z)

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.