arXiv · 2605.15864
Are VLMs Seeing or Just Saying? Uncovering the Illusion of Visual Re-examination
Abstract
Vision-Language Models (VLMs) often produce self-reflective statements like "let me check the figure again" during reasoning. Do such statements trigger genuine visual re-examination, or are they merely learned textual patterns? We investigate this via VisualSwap, an image-swap probing framework: after a model reasons over an image, we replace it with a visually similar but semantically different one and test whether the model notices. We introduce VS-Bench, 800 image pairs curated from MathVista, MathVerse, MathVision, and MMMU-Pro. Experiments on Qwen3-VL, Kimi-VL, and ERNIE-VL reveal a striking failure: models overwhelmingly miss the swap, with accuracy dropping by up to 60%. Counterintuitively, thinking models are nearly 3x more vulnerable than their instructed counterparts, and scaling offers no mitigation. Multi-turn user instructions restore visual grounding, but self-generated reflective statements during continuous generation do not. Attention analysis explains why: user instructions substantially elevate attention to visual tokens, whereas self-reflection does not. Current VLMs tend to say rather than actually see when claiming to perform visual re-examination. Our code and dataset are available at the project page: https://visualswap.github.io
Explore related subjects
Keep this discovery
Explore connections, maps & timelines
Chufan Shi, Cheng Yang, Yaokang Wu, Linghao Jin, Bo Shui, Taylor Berg-Kirkpatrick, Xuezhe Ma. 2026-05-15. Are VLMs Seeing or Just Saying? Uncovering the Illusion of Visual Re-examination. https://arxiv.org/abs/2605.15864
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.