Benchmarking Deflection and Hallucination in Large Vision-Language Models

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.12033v1
• Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2026 20:22:22 GMT
• Title: Benchmarking Deflection and Hallucination in Large Vision-Language Models
• Abstract summary: Existing benchmarks overlook conflicts between visual and textual evidence.<n>We introduce VLM-DeflectionBench, a benchmark of 2,775 samples spanning diverse multimodal retrieval settings.<n>Our results highlight the need to evaluate not only what models know, but how they behave when they do not.
• Score: 25.176271096443482
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
• Abstract: Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs) increasingly rely on retrieval to answer knowledge-intensive multimodal questions. Existing benchmarks overlook conflicts between visual and textual evidence and the importance of generating deflections (e.g., Sorry, I cannot answer...) when retrieved knowledge is incomplete. These benchmarks also suffer from rapid obsolescence, as growing LVLM training sets allow models to answer many questions without retrieval. We address these gaps with three contributions. First, we propose a dynamic data curation pipeline that preserves benchmark difficulty over time by filtering for genuinely retrieval-dependent samples. Second, we introduce VLM-DeflectionBench, a benchmark of 2,775 samples spanning diverse multimodal retrieval settings, designed to probe model behaviour under conflicting or insufficient evidence. Third, we define a fine-grained evaluation protocol with four scenarios that disentangle parametric memorization from retrieval robustness. Experiments across 20 state-of-the-art LVLMs indicate that models usually fail to deflect in the presence of noisy or misleading evidence. Our results highlight the need to evaluate not only what models know, but how they behave when they do not, and serve as a reusable and extensible benchmark for reliable KB-VQA evaluation. All resources will be publicly available upon publication.

Related papers

• Knowing When Not to Answer: Evaluating Abstention in Multimodal Reasoning Systems [52.83669998269706]
  Abstention has been studied in text-only settings but remains underexplored multimodally.<n>Current benchmarks either ignore unanswerability or rely on coarse methods that miss realistic failure modes.<n>We introduce MM-AQA, a benchmark that constructs unanswerable instances from answerable ones via transformations along two axes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-16T09:23:22Z)
• Look Twice: Training-Free Evidence Highlighting in Multimodal Large Language Models [27.14308995992974]
  We introduce Look Twice (LoT), a training-free inference-time framework that improves how pretrained MLLMs utilize multimodal evidence.<n>LoT estimates which visual regions and retrieved textual elements are relevant to a query, and then generates the answer conditioned on this highlighted evidence.<n> Experiments across multiple knowledge-based VQA benchmarks show consistent improvements over zero-shot MLLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-01T18:00:08Z)
• MR$^2$-Bench: Going Beyond Matching to Reasoning in Multimodal Retrieval [86.35779264575154]
  Multimodal retrieval is becoming a crucial component of modern AI applications, yet its evaluation lags behind the demands of more realistic and challenging scenarios.<n>We introduce MR$2$-Bench, a reasoning-intensive benchmark for multimodal retrieval.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-30T15:09:14Z)
• Self-Consistency as a Free Lunch: Reducing Hallucinations in Vision-Language Models via Self-Reflection [71.8243083897721]
  Vision-language models often hallucinate details, generating non-existent objects or inaccurate attributes that compromise output reliability.<n>We present a novel framework that leverages the model's self-consistency between long responses and short answers to generate preference pairs for training.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-27T10:37:11Z)
• Measuring Epistemic Humility in Multimodal Large Language Models [17.490955813494693]
  We present HumbleBench, a new hallucination benchmark designed to evaluate MLLMs' ability to reject plausible but incorrect answers.<n>We leverage fine-grained scene graph annotations to extract ground-truth entities and relations, and prompt GPT-4-Turbo to generate multiple-choice questions.<n>HumbleBench fills a key gap in current evaluation suites, providing a more realistic measure of MLLM reliability in safety-critical settings.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-11T17:54:00Z)
• KnowDR-REC: A Benchmark for Referring Expression Comprehension with Real-World Knowledge [1.5833270109954136]
  We propose KnowDR-REC, built upon real-world knowledge, requiring fine-grained multimodal reasoning across text and image.<n>We evaluate 16 state-of-the-art multimodal models on KnowDR-REC, with experimental results showing that existing MLLMs still struggle with knowledge-driven visual grounding tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-12T19:43:44Z)
• Revisiting LLM Value Probing Strategies: Are They Robust and Expressive? [81.49470136653665]
  We evaluate the robustness and expressiveness of value representations across three widely used probing strategies.<n>We show that the demographic context has little effect on the free-text generation, and the models' values only weakly correlate with their preference for value-based actions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-17T18:56:41Z)
• Unveiling the Tapestry of Consistency in Large Vision-Language Models [25.106467574467448]
  We provide a benchmark ConBench to intuitively analyze how LVLMs perform when the solution space of a prompt revolves around a knowledge point. Based on the ConBench tool, we are the first to reveal the tapestry and get the following findings. We hope this paper will accelerate the research community in better evaluating their models and encourage future advancements in the consistency domain.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-23T04:08:23Z)
• Detecting Multimodal Situations with Insufficient Context and Abstaining from Baseless Predictions [75.45274978665684]
  Vision-Language Understanding (VLU) benchmarks contain samples where answers rely on assumptions unsupported by the provided context.<n>We collect contextual data for each sample whenever available and train a context selection module to facilitate evidence-based model predictions.<n>We develop a general-purpose Context-AwaRe Abstention detector to identify samples lacking sufficient context and enhance model accuracy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-18T02:21:32Z)
• ReEval: Automatic Hallucination Evaluation for Retrieval-Augmented Large Language Models via Transferable Adversarial Attacks [91.55895047448249]
  This paper presents ReEval, an LLM-based framework using prompt chaining to perturb the original evidence for generating new test cases. We implement ReEval using ChatGPT and evaluate the resulting variants of two popular open-domain QA datasets. Our generated data is human-readable and useful to trigger hallucination in large language models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-19T06:37:32Z)

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.