CORE: Conflict-Oriented Reasoning for General Multimodal Manipulation Detection

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2606.03066v1
• Date: Tue, 02 Jun 2026 02:53:48 GMT
• Title: CORE: Conflict-Oriented Reasoning for General Multimodal Manipulation Detection
• Abstract summary: generative AI has made multimodal fake news increasingly realistic and pervasive, posing severe threats to public trust and social stability.<n>We propose textbfConflict-textbfOriented textbfREasoning (textbfCORE) framework, an effective paradigm that learns to endows multimodal large language models (MLLMs) with explicit conflict-capturing capability.<n> CORE achieves robust and generalizable conflict detection, effectively and rapidly adapting to unseen manipulation types with a few samples or in even zero-shot settings.
• Score: 56.64398465636452
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: The rapid rise of generative AI has made multimodal fake news increasingly realistic and pervasive, posing severe threats to public trust and social stability. Existing detection methods rely heavily on manipulation-specific models and large-scale labeled data, resulting in poor generalization to emerging manipulation types. We observed that the essence of manipulated misinformation lies in its intrinsic conflicts, \textbf{i.e.,} semantic or physical inconsistencies either across modalities or with common world knowledge. Inspired by this observation, we propose \textbf{C}onflict-\textbf{O}riented \textbf{RE}asoning (\textbf{CORE}) framework, an effective paradigm that learns to endows multimodal large language models (MLLMs) with explicit conflict-capturing capability. To this end, CORE first constructs the Conflict Attribution Corpus (CAC) with fine-grained annotations of conflict factors and sources, providing essential data support for subsequent conflict perception training. By performing conflict-oriented representation enhancement and reasoning based on CAC, CORE achieves robust and generalizable conflict detection, effectively and rapidly adapting to unseen manipulation types with a few samples or in even zero-shot settings. Extensive experiments demonstrate that CORE surpasses state-of-the-art models. The dataset and code are publicly available at https://github.com/shen8424/CORE.

Related papers

• CAER: Conflict-Aware Evidence Routing with Dual Prefix Experts for Multimodal Large Language Models [25.759863166571858]
  We propose CAER, a backbone-agnostic framework for visual-language conflict detection and conflict-aware generation.<n>We show that CAER effectively detects visual-language conflicts and improves the reliability of open-source MLLMs without updating their backbone parameters.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-31T03:38:12Z)
• Conflict-Resilient Multi-Agent Reasoning via Signed Graph Modeling [22.248543228906115]
  LLM-based multi-agent systems (MAS) have demonstrated strong reasoning and decision-making capabilities.<n>We introduce SIGMA, a novel SIgned Graph-informed Multi-Agent reasoning framework.<n>We show that SIGMA consistently outperforms state-of-the-art baselines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-19T06:11:11Z)
• Mitigating Context-Memory Conflicts in LLMs through Dynamic Cognitive Reconciliation Decoding [51.242997961841276]
  Large language models accumulate parametric knowledge through pre-training.<n> knowledge conflicts occur when outdated or incorrect parametric knowledge conflicts with external knowledge in the context.<n>Existing methods address knowledge conflicts through contrastive decoding, but in conflict-free scenarios, static approaches disrupt output distribution.<n>We propose Dynamic Cognitive Reconciliation Decoding (DCRD), to predict and context-memory conflicts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-12T14:29:45Z)
• Breaking Contextual Inertia: Reinforcement Learning with Single-Turn Anchors for Stable Multi-Turn Interaction [49.03500737694832]
  We introduce textbfReinforcement textbfLearning with textbfTurn textbfRLSTA, a generalizable training approach designed to stabilize multi-turn interaction.<n>Experiments show that RLSTA significantly outperforms standard fine-tuning and abstention-based methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-05T04:04:59Z)
• Diagnosing Knowledge Conflict in Multimodal Long-Chain Reasoning [78.86309644343295]
  Multimodal large language models (MLLMs) in long chain-of-thought reasoning often fail when different knowledge sources provide conflicting signals.<n>We formalize these failures under a unified notion of knowledge conflict, distinguishing input-level objective conflict from process-level effective conflict.<n>Our findings provide a mechanism-level view of multimodal reasoning under knowledge conflict and enable principled diagnosis and control of long-CoT failures.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-16T07:10:44Z)
• 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)
• That's Deprecated! Understanding, Detecting, and Steering Knowledge Conflicts in Language Models for Code Generation [55.78914774437411]
  Large language models (LLMs) behave when faced with discrepancies between their parametric knowledge and conflicting information contained in a prompt.<n>We propose a domain-agnostic framework for constructing and interpreting such conflicts.<n>We show that activation-level steering can achieve up to a textbf12.6% improvement in steering success over a random baseline.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-21T22:27:56Z)
• DRAGged into Conflicts: Detecting and Addressing Conflicting Sources in Search-Augmented LLMs [36.47787866482107]
  Retrieval Augmented Generation (RAG) is a commonly used approach for enhancing large language models.<n>We propose a novel taxonomy of knowledge conflict types in RAG, along with the desired model behavior for each type.<n>We then introduce CONFLICTS, a high-quality benchmark with expert annotations of conflict types in a realistic RAG setting.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-10T06:52:57Z)
• ECon: On the Detection and Resolution of Evidence Conflicts [56.89209046429291]
  The rise of large language models (LLMs) has significantly influenced the quality of information in decision-making systems. This study introduces a method for generating diverse, validated evidence conflicts to simulate real-world misinformation scenarios.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-05T07:41:17Z)
• Unraveling Cross-Modality Knowledge Conflicts in Large Vision-Language Models [33.76903352835436]
  Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs) have demonstrated impressive capabilities for capturing and reasoning over multimodal inputs. These models are prone to parametric knowledge conflicts, which arise from inconsistencies of represented knowledge between their vision and language components. We present a systematic approach to detect, interpret, and mitigate them.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-04T17:59:28Z)

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.