Do Vision-Language-Action Models Mean What They Say? On the Role of Faithfulness in Embodied Reasoning

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2607.04681v1
• Date: Mon, 06 Jul 2026 05:10:27 GMT
• Title: Do Vision-Language-Action Models Mean What They Say? On the Role of Faithfulness in Embodied Reasoning
• Abstract summary: Embodied Chain-of-Thought has emerged as a promising mechanism to enhance robot decision-making.<n>We argue that SoTA alignment strategies offer a necessary but insufficient notion of faithfulness.<n>We operationalize a behavioral surrogate for embodied faithfulness through a learned critic, Pinocchio.
• Score: 17.56588495990139
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Embodied Chain-of-Thought has emerged as a promising mechanism to enhance robot decision-making and interpretability in black-box Vision-Language Action (VLA) models. However, whether this verbalized Chain-of-Thought truthfully reflects the policy's underlying decision process remains poorly understood. We distinguish between functional reasoning, in which reasoning improves task performance, and faithful reasoning, in which reasoning truly reflects the policy's internal decision process. We argue that SoTA alignment strategies offer a necessary but insufficient notion of faithfulness, admitting reasoning whose intermediate steps can mask the causal links in action prediction through confounding factors (e.g., reasoning that is ungrounded in the environment and internally disconnected or inconsistent), restricting policy generalization. We study this gap through a human evaluation of a SoTA reasoning model for autonomous driving, revealing an inconsistent coupling between reasoning quality and downstream trajectory improvement. We then operationalize a behavioral surrogate for embodied faithfulness through a learned critic, Pinocchio, scoring observation grounding and stepwise coherence, and use this critic as a dense reward signal in post-training an embodied policy with reinforcement learning. Across withheld driving benchmarks, our post-trained planner improves faithfulness by 4% and 18% over SoTA alignment and trajectory error post-training baselines, respectively, while maintaining competitive downstream task performance. Finally, on a synthetic out-of-distribution test set, post-training for faithfulness improves policy responsiveness to rare counterfactual scenarios by 1.6x that of a SoTA policy, suggesting that faithful reasoning traces contribute to more robust, generalizable, and interpretable embodied intelligence. Project page: https://mjf-su.github.io/pinocchio/

Related papers

• Why2Speak: Faithful Reasoning for Abstaining Action Policies [0.19336815376402716]
  We compare direct decision policies, reasoning policies, supervised fine-tuning, and reinforcement learning.<n>We find a capability-auditability tradeoff: the strongest direct policy achieves higher quality but exposes no reasoning to inspect.<n>Supervised fine-tuning either suppresses reasoning or preserves it without improving decision quality, while reinforcement learning also fails to improve the reasoning policy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-21T02:00:21Z)
• Does Reasoning Preserve Alignment? On the Trustworthiness of Large Reasoning Models [55.788110316999166]
  We compare reasoning models produced via supervised fine-tuning, RL-based post-training, and distillation against instruction-tuned baselines.<n>We observe that reasoning models often improve on reasoning benchmarks but exhibit alignment regressions.<n>These regressions are consistent with behavioral drift from the instruction-tuned baseline, measured by KL divergence.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-09T16:14:27Z)
• FACT-E: Causality-Inspired Evaluation for Trustworthy Chain-of-Thought Reasoning [49.65751420291115]
  Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting has improved LLM reasoning, but models often generate explanations that appear coherent while containing unfaithful intermediate steps.<n>We propose FACT-E, a causality-inspired framework for evaluating CoT quality.<n>We show that FACT-E improves reasoning-trajectory selection and yields stronger in-context learnings.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-12T15:35:08Z)
• Verify Before You Commit: Towards Faithful Reasoning in LLM Agents via Self-Auditing [5.497064111008921]
  We propose textbfSelf-textbfAudited textbfVerified textbfReasoning (textscSAVeR), a novel framework that enforces verification over internal belief states within the agent before action commitment.<n>Our approach consistently improves reasoning faithfulness while preserving competitive end-task performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-09T16:01:03Z)
• Balancing Faithfulness and Performance in Reasoning via Multi-Listener Soft Execution [79.98699884805636]
  Reasoning Execution by Multiple Listeners (REMUL) is a multi-party reinforcement learning approach.<n>REMUL builds on the hypothesis that reasoning traces which other parties can follow will be more faithful.<n>Speakers are rewarded for producing reasoning that is clear to listeners.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-18T02:55:55Z)
• Towards Generalizable Reasoning: Group Causal Counterfactual Policy Optimization for LLM Reasoning [50.352417879912515]
  Large language models (LLMs) excel at complex tasks with advances in reasoning capabilities.<n>We propose Group Causal Counterfactual Policy Optimization to explicitly train LLMs to learn generalizable reasoning patterns.<n>We then construct token-level advantages from this reward and optimize the policy, encouraging LLMs to favor reasoning patterns that are process-valid and counterfactually robust.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-06T08:03:11Z)
• ALIVE: Awakening LLM Reasoning via Adversarial Learning and Instructive Verbal Evaluation [4.265094703231012]
  We introduce textbfALIVE (emphAdrial Learning with Instructive Verbal Evaluation), a hands-free alignment framework.<n>By coupling adversarial learning with instructive verbal feedback, ALIVE enables models to internalize evaluative criteria directly from raw corpora.<n>With identical data and compute, ALIVE achieves markedly improved cross-domain generalization, and higher self-correction rates.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-05T09:20:23Z)
• Gaming the Judge: Unfaithful Chain-of-Thought Can Undermine Agent Evaluation [76.5533899503582]
  Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used as judges to evaluate agent performance.<n>We show this paradigm implicitly assumes that the agent's chain-of-thought (CoT) reasoning faithfully reflects both its internal reasoning and the underlying environment state.<n>We demonstrate that manipulated reasoning alone can inflate false positive rates of state-of-the-art VLM judges by up to 90% across 800 trajectories spanning diverse web tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-21T06:07:43Z)
• Journey Before Destination: On the importance of Visual Faithfulness in Slow Thinking [11.763473690046721]
  Reasoning-augmented vision language models generate explicit chains of thought that promise greater capability and transparency.<n>Models may reach correct answers via visually unfaithful intermediate steps, or reason faithfully yet fail on the final prediction.<n>We introduce the visual faithfulness of reasoning chains as a distinct evaluation dimension, focusing on whether the perception steps of a reasoning chain are grounded in the image.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-13T07:04:42Z)
• Is Reasoning All You Need? Probing Bias in the Age of Reasoning Language Models [0.0]
  Reasoning Language Models (RLMs) have gained traction for their ability to perform complex, multi-step reasoning tasks.<n>While these capabilities promise improved reliability, their impact on robustness to social biases remains unclear.<n>We leverage the CLEAR-Bias benchmark to investigate the adversarial robustness of RLMs to bias elicitation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-03T17:01:53Z)
• Consistent Paths Lead to Truth: Self-Rewarding Reinforcement Learning for LLM Reasoning [87.7836502955847]
  We propose a novel self-rewarding reinforcement learning framework to enhance Large Language Model (LLM) reasoning.<n>Our key insight is that correct responses often exhibit consistent trajectory patterns in terms of model likelihood.<n>We introduce CoVo, an intrinsic reward mechanism that integrates Consistency and Volatility via a robust vector-space aggregation strategy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-10T12:40:39Z)

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.