EVADE: Evidence-Verified Agentic Diagnosis with Escape

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2608.18833v1
• Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2026 11:51:24 GMT
• Title: EVADE: Evidence-Verified Agentic Diagnosis with Escape
• Abstract summary: EVADE is an inferential, non-training method that enhances the safety of deploying a single frozen VLM.<n>It commits only when both the entire image and the zoomed view responses agree.<n>It reduces expected calibration error (ECE) by up to 45% compared to zero-shot.
• Score: 0.880899367147235
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Medical vision-language models (VLMs) can achieve high accuracy but remain unreliable: they are systematically overconfident, benefit little from test-time reasoning, and lack the ability to reliably calibrate trust in their own responses. We introduce EVADE (Evidence-Verified Agentic Diagnosis with Escape), an inferential, non-training method that enhances the safety of deploying a single frozen VLM. EVADE responds and, when uncertain, localises the region most diagnostically relevant, re-answers on a zoomed view, and commits only when both the entire image and the zoomed view responses agree; otherwise, it abstains. To directly address verification hallucination in single-model self-checking, our main idea is to verify gate consistency across different image views rather than re-reading the model's own text. Experimental evaluation on VQA-RAD, SLAKE, and PathVQA using Qwen2.5-VL-7B reports that EVADE is the only method that simultaneously improves both calibration and selective risk while maintaining accuracy, reducing expected calibration error (ECE) by up to 45% compared to zero-shot. Chain-of-thought, self-consistency, and self-verification all fail at least one axis. A grounding analysis reports that self-proposed regions perform better at diagnostic structure localisation than centres or random crops. However, a 7B VLM cannot use this localisation to revise answers. Therefore, reliability gains come from the consistency gate and calibrated abstention.

Related papers

• SVR: Self-Verifying Refinement via Joint Verdict-Confidence Reinforcement Learning for Adaptive Test-Time Compute [62.3458279176813]
  Self-Verifying Refinement is an oracle-free multi-turn reinforcement learning framework.<n>It learns to use self-verification as a compute-control policy.<n>It achieves a macro-average accuracy of 0.563 with only 2.99 inference turns on average.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-30T16:20:58Z)
• Breaking Déjà Vu: Independent Auditing of Visual Place Recognition through Vision-Language Reasoning [16.054905457693824]
  Visual place recognition (VPR) is a key enabler of accurate localization and long-term autonomous navigation in robotics applications.<n>VLM-based auditing improves recall@1 by 13.6% on average as compared to state-of-the-art methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-14T14:30:24Z)
• TrustVLA: Mechanism-Guided Inference-Time Defense Against Vision-Language-Action Backdoors [54.12833308568015]
  Vision-Language-Action (VLA) models are deployed through pipelines that end users cannot audit.<n>A small visual trigger redirects a long-horizon robot policy before any failure becomes observable.<n>We study this gap through two independently proposed VLA attacks from groups with distinct injection strategies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-14T09:43:52Z)
• Just how sure are you? Improving Verbalized Uncertainty Calibration in Medical VQA [0.16383644639245779]
  Multimodal large language models (MLLMs) applied to Medical Visual Question Answering (VQA) tend to produce overconfident outputs regardless of actual correctness.<n>This work proposes a training based framework that finetunes MLLMs to improve their calibration using a composite loss function.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-25T13:33:58Z)
• Discovery of Hidden Miscalibration Regimes [52.452902154360565]
  Models may be systematically overconfident on some kinds of inputs and underconfident on others.<n>We define the corresponding miscalibration field and propose a diagnostic framework for estimating it.<n>Our approach learns a calibration-aware representation of the input space and estimates signed local miscalibration by kernel smoothing in the learned geometry.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-13T13:07:50Z)
• Verification Mirage: Mapping the Reliability Boundary of Self-Verification in Medical VQA [36.64345996280624]
  Self-verification is increasingly used as a default safety layer for medical visual question answering.<n>We introduce [METHOD NAME], a diagnostic framework for mapping the reliability boundary of medical VLM self-verification.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-11T17:00:00Z)
• Correct Answers from Sound Reasoning: Verifiable Process Supervision for Language Models [94.68358825189738]
  We propose a post-training framework for verifiable domains that jointly optimize prediction accuracy and reasoning quality.<n>We evaluate VPS on chess, a controlled testbed where reasoning steps can be deterministically verified against engine signals.<n>VPS preserves accuracy while significantly improving reasoning quality, reducing win-rate error by up to 30% and restoring consistency to near saturation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-03T15:19:46Z)
• Guideline-Grounded Evidence Accumulation for High-Stakes Agent Verification [60.18369393468405]
  Existing verifiers usually underperform owing to a lack of domain knowledge and limited calibration.<n>GLEAN compiles expert-curated protocols into trajectory-informed, well-calibrated correctness signals.<n>We empirically validate GLEAN with agentic clinical diagnosis across three diseases from the MIMIC-IV dataset.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-03T09:36:43Z)
• Evaluating Reasoning Faithfulness in Medical Vision-Language Models using Multimodal Perturbations [19.488236277427358]
  Vision-language models (VLMs) often produce chain-of-thought (CoT) explanations that sound plausible yet fail to reflect the underlying decision process.<n>We present a clinically grounded framework for chest X-ray visual question answering (VQA) that probes CoT faithfulness via controlled text and image modifications.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-13T09:28:22Z)
• VulAgent: Hypothesis-Validation based Multi-Agent Vulnerability Detection [55.957275374847484]
  VulAgent is a multi-agent vulnerability detection framework based on hypothesis validation.<n>It implements a semantics-sensitive, multi-view detection pipeline, each aligned to a specific analysis perspective.<n>On average, VulAgent improves overall accuracy by 6.6%, increases the correct identification rate of vulnerable--fixed code pairs by up to 450%, and reduces the false positive rate by about 36%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-15T02:25:38Z)
• Trusted Uncertainty in Large Language Models: A Unified Framework for Confidence Calibration and Risk-Controlled Refusal [31.458406135473805]
  We present UniCR, a unified framework that turns heterogeneous uncertainty evidence into a calibrated probability of correctness.<n>UniCR learns a lightweight calibration head with temperature scaling and proper scoring.<n>Experiments on short-form QA, code generation with execution tests, and retrieval-augmented long-form QA show consistent improvements in calibration metrics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-01T13:14:58Z)
• Towards Calibrated Robust Fine-Tuning of Vision-Language Models [97.19901765814431]
  This work proposes a robust fine-tuning method that improves both OOD accuracy and confidence calibration simultaneously in vision language models. We show that both OOD classification and OOD calibration errors have a shared upper bound consisting of two terms of ID data. Based on this insight, we design a novel framework that conducts fine-tuning with a constrained multimodal contrastive loss enforcing a larger smallest singular value.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-03T05:41:25Z)

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.