The results show that referent selection and boundary precision are partially separable, with different components moving opposing regions of the IoU curve -- behavior a single threshold cannot reveal.
Abstract
Vision--language models can identify the correct referent while returning an imprecise bounding box. We study whether a frozen direct-answer model can use its own prediction to allocate one additional localized observation without accessing target annotations at inference. Label-free precision refinement (LFPR) routes predicted-small regions to a higher-resolution pass, re-grounds the expression inside a context crop, admits a candidate only under fixed geometric guards, and returns a fixed coordinate-wise midpoint. We report results across three evidence tiers. On 31,921 retrospective Ref-L4 expressions, LFPR raises mAcc$_{0.5:0.95}$ from 72.947\% to 76.013\% (Acc@0.5 88.531\%$\to$89.725\%, Acc@0.9 55.788\%$\to$61.142\%). A frozen transfer to 30,969 RefCOCO/RefCOCO+/RefCOCOg expressions improves every dataset at Acc@0.5, mAcc, and mean IoU (pooled mAcc $+0.645$, Acc@0.5 $+0.817$), while Acc@0.9 is unchanged overall: routing alone gains $+1.162$ points there, but crop, guards, and fusion give back $-1.192$, offsetting rather than showing no strict-IoU effect. A prospective, image-disjoint Flickr30K Entities evaluation improves every endpoint (mAcc $+0.973$, Acc@0.9 $+1.022$), more strongly under a single-box variant (mAcc $+2.575$, Acc@0.9 $+3.689$). The same operator applied to two released grounding specialists improves every endpoint (Acc@0.9 $+1.569$/$+6.716$ for EGM-4B/8B) at roughly twice the latency, composing with specialist training rather than replacing it. A genuine unguarded control (guard removed from the same candidates) underperforms the incumbent on every metric, showing the guard is load-bearing. Together, these results show that referent selection and boundary precision are partially separable, with different components moving opposing regions of the IoU curve -- behavior a single threshold cannot reveal.
Multimodal LLMs that recognise events reliably still fail to say when they happen. Prompted for timestamps, strong VLMs reach as little as $3.8\%$ R@0.5 on Charades-STA, and $77$ to $80\%$ of their wrong predictions carry low output entropy: the models are confidently wrong, and entropy-based error detection stays below a random classifier. We show that this failure lives in the task interface, not in perception. Holding the weights fixed, replacing timestamp regression with a coarse-to-fine scan of binary questions, whose first-token probabilities are consumed only as a ranking, raises R@0.5 by $28$ to $50$ points across four frozen backbones. The residual failures decompose into two measurable axes: a perception axis that moves with the backbone, and a geometry axis that is analytically predictable from the ratio of the output-window and event widths. FV-Action, the training-free method built on this analysis, reaches $56.8\%$ R@0.5 on Charades-STA, above the same backbone's native grounding pipeline and the strongest training-free result on this benchmark; it surpasses every TVG-trained model evaluated zero-shot on TACoS, and improves over direct prediction on ActivityNet Captions and QVHighlights, with no temporal supervision at any stage.
Computer-use agents ground natural-language instructions in screenshots to locate interface elements, yet existing benchmarks do not isolate whether models bind relational language to the correct element. We introduce GUI-Primitives, a 994-item benchmark of contrastive instruction pairs over seven spatial relations in graphical user interfaces (left/right, above/below, containment, alignment, proximity, list ordinal, occlusion). Each pair holds the screenshot and anchor fixed while changing the relation expression, so the correct target moves between two designated candidates. Five annotators validate a 196-item subset ($\kappa = 0.94$ well-formedness; $\kappa = 0.79$ target selection). Nineteen vision-language models reach at most $32\%$ strict point-in-box accuracy. Because models emit unconstrained coordinates, we classify each prediction by the candidate region it falls within. Predictions fall outside both candidates on $60-92\%$ of items. Conditional on falling within a candidate region, target selection reaches 0.82-0.90 for horizontal position, vertical position, proximity, and list ordinal, but does not differ significantly from 0.50 for containment and occlusion: most failures reflect candidate localization rather than relation understanding. Across ten models, benchmark accuracy correlates with ScreenSpot-Pro accuracy (Spearman $\rho = +0.74$), an exploratory association at this sample size. Marking the two designated candidates raises selection accuracy by 35--57 percentage points, an oracle diagnostic that supplies the candidate set rather than a deployable method. We release the benchmark, predictions, and code.
Visual-token pruning is usually judged by answer quality at a fixed retention budget. For text-rich multimodal large language models (MLLMs), this protocol can miss a distinct failure: an answer remains correct even when no retained token is locally traceable to the small OCR region that supports it. We turn this blind spot into an evidence-risk audit that couples answer behavior with geometric token-origin provenance, interventions, and realized cost; transparent training-free selectors isolate controlled operating points. On locked image-disjoint confirmation, Qwen Target at 30% retention has observed accuracy 0.786 versus 0.783 for Full (paired image-cluster difference +0.003, 95% CI [-0.014, +0.020]), yet same-budget Target, Random, and Grid retain sharply different positive-support coverage: 0.620, 0.270, and 0.318. Across Qwen3-VL-8B, LLaVA-1.5-7B, and InternVL3.5-8B, matched controls, interventions, detector tests, and external methods reveal model-specific quality-risk-traceability frontiers that accuracy alone does not expose. Materialized prefixes yield up to 4.32x batch-prefill speedup and 76.4% lower incremental peak memory; full-validation TextVQA and DocVQA further show that favorable target-verification points do not imply task-general compression. Visual-token pruning should therefore report surviving spatial provenance and realized cost alongside quality and compression.
Feixiang Liu, Qiang Qiu, Hao Zhang et al.· 0 citations
Vision-language models (VLMs) increasingly rely on point coordinates as a compact and executable interface for visual grounding in GUI interaction, robotic manipulation, and interactive visual systems. However, learning reliable pointing behavior remains difficult because the supervision space is inherently non-unique: many coordinates may be valid within the same target region, while multi-instance instructions require target coverage, count consistency, and duplicate suppression. This work presents PointRL, a verifiable reinforcement learning framework that learns point-level grounding from existing heterogeneous annotation evidence. PointRL converts bounding boxes, masks, and instance labels into pointing instructions, while retaining their target supports, instance membership, and set constraints as hidden verifier evidence, i.e., annotations kept outside the prompt and used by a deterministic checker to score predictions. The proposed reward evaluates parseability, point validity, instance coverage, cardinality consistency, and redundant or missing predictions. On PointArena, PointRL improves the overall accuracy of Qwen3.5-4B from 56.11% to 65.58%. Further evaluations on RoboSpatial, BLINK, and Ref-Adv show same-backbone gains on the evaluated external benchmarks, suggesting that verifiable point-level feedback may benefit spatial grounding in these settings.
Jing-Yang Su, Pu Cao, Xiu-Ze Jin et al.· 0 citations
Compact world models that condition on a language goal promise to ground relations such as ``put the red block left of the blue block''using a sparse set of explicit \emph{reference anchors}. We ask when such references actually ground a relation, and identify a trap: a goal-conditioned predictor reaches a striking $0.90$ relation-readout accuracy, yet this is \emph{instruction transcription}, not perception. Withholding the goal collapses it to chance ($0.90\!\to\!0.27$, three seeds) and a counterfactual instruction makes the predicted anchors follow the \emph{false} instruction $94.5\%$ of the time (true scene $2.3\%$; $N{=}256$). Tested across three settings and a within-task ablation, our central claim characterizes the confound: \textbf{instruction leakage occurs when the scored quantity is transcribable from the instruction (when the instruction names the answer) and is essentially independent of how predictive the non-instruction inputs are.} Our tabletop and the external BabyAI benchmark leak, whereas a Language-Table forward-dynamics world model whose instruction names \emph{referents} does not, until the instruction is augmented to name the direction; and degrading the action never increases leakage, the opposite of what predictor-competition predicts. The diagnosis prescribes the fix: keep the goal out of the dynamics (it belongs to the planner's cost) and supervise the \emph{read} path, recovering genuine, instruction-independent grounding ($0.88$, identical with and without the goal). The detection protocol and remedy apply to any goal-conditioned world model whose instruction names the scored quantity.
This work introduces Visualized Task Semantics (VTS), a controlled intervention that moves the question into the image while keeping the source problem and answer fixed, and requires no OCR or region metadata at inference.
Yongxin Wang, Ruizhe Zhou, Yueling Tang et al.· 0 citations
What if pathology foundation models could do more with less? GigaPath-Flash and GigaTIME-Flash cut computational demands while maintaining strong performance, opening the door to larger studies and broader exploration. The post GigaPath-Flash and GigaTIME-Flash: Toward population-scale discovery with efficient pathology foundation models appeared first on Microsoft Research.
MIT News · Artificial Intelligence· news.mit.eduAug 31, 2026
With millions of users across the world, Julia has been used to conduct cutting-edge research and to design new drugs, jet engines, heat pumps, and more.