Preprint

It's the Decoding Format, Not the Perturbation: Auditing Consistency-Based Selection for Vision-Language Test-Time Scaling

Puzhuo Zheng Hasan Kurban

Aug 2026 · 0 citations · 35 references

Computer Science

TL;DR

Perturbation consistency is at best a partial diagnostic of visual dependence and, on its own, not a usable selection signal once format is controlled; gains reported against CoT-only majority voting overstate such methods.

Abstract

Test-time scaling lifts large language model reasoning by sampling many candidate solutions and selecting among them, yet the same recipe transfers poorly to vision-language models (VLMs): recent work shows that simple majority voting beats selection methods built on the model's own self-verification, apparently because at the selection layer an image-grounded answer and a confident guess from the language prior look the same. A natural fix is to make the selection signal one that cannot be computed without the image. We study Perturbation Grounded Selection (Pgs), a label-free, training-free rule that scores each candidate by whether the model re-derives it under label-preserving perturbations of the input (cropping, background masking, mild photometric or geometric jitter); Pgs recovers majority voting when the perturbation set is empty. The decisive question is not whether Pgs beats chain-of-thought only majority voting, but whether the perturbation term adds anything once decoding format and budget are controlled. We therefore introduce a format-matched control (MatchedCtrl): the same short, no-CoT draws spent on the original image. Across TextVQA, MATH-Vision, MMMU, and ViLP, with a Qwen headline (three-seed means) and LLaVA-OneVision coverage in matched-budget selector tables, Pgs appears to beat plain majority voting by up to +31.8 points on TextVQA (Qwen), but MatchedCtrl tracks or exceeds Pgs within noise on every benchmark, including the vision-required ViLP; no Qwen category shows a significant gain over this control. The stability gap is real and image-dependent (up to +0.48), yet does not predict per-instance wins. The result is negative and diagnostic: perturbation consistency is at best a partial diagnostic of visual dependence and, on its own, not a usable selection signal once format is controlled; gains reported against CoT-only majority voting overstate such methods.

arXiv Semantic Scholar

View source

Similar papers

Review Aug 2026

Which Source Wins? Task-Dependent Reliance in Vision-Language Models

Modality reliance in VLMs is not fixed, but varies across tasks, evidence structures, models, and evaluation settings, which shows that modality reliance in VLMs is not fixed, but varies across tasks, evidence structures, and evaluation settings.

Rodela Ghosh, Aviral Gupta, Guang-Jing Wang · 0 citations

Jul 2026

Bigger or Cheaper? Scale and Quantization Effects on Uncertainty Signals in Vision-Language Models Under Image Degradation

This work measures, on identical inputs, how model scale and 4-bit quantization affect two confidence signals in the Qwen2-VL family: the confidence a model states in natural language, and its own mean token probability over the answer it generates, and argues that error-detection AUROC is the metric that exposes the difference between the two signals.

M. M. Asif Ferdous · arXiv.org · 0 citations

Preprint Aug 2026

Consistency Has a Computable Blind Spot: A Commutation Theory of Label-Free Reliability for Vision-Language Figure Reading

Label-free reliability for vision-language models rests on invariance: perturb the input and a faithful reader's answer should not change. This has a known blind spot, a systematic misreading survives the perturbation and gets certified wrong, which we show is computable, not just real: an error is invisible to an edit exactly when the two commute, so the errors a suite cannot reach form its joint centralizer, a set that shrinks as edits are added and can be written down rather than guessed at. We act on the complementary relation, equivariance: edit a figure's data and the correct answer must change by a computable amount. Two matched edits are provably complete for affine reading errors; no suite of swap edits is complete for label permutations, and cyclic relabeling closes most of that gap. We instantiate the theory as the Equivariance-Consistency Score, a label-free, training-free detector, and release REND-EQUIV, pairing matched invariance and equivariance sets over identical data. The predicted ordering holds across three models and a hand-labeled population immune to the one circularity in how it is selected; a second invariance-family method confirms the blind spot belongs to the relation, not to any implementation; and cyclic relabeling delivers its predicted gain on a matched real sample. The same characterization explains a reported inversion of this ordering in the classifier metamorphic-testing literature: detectability is a joint property of the relation and the fault class, never of the relation alone.

Rasul Khanbayov, Hasan Kurban · 0 citations

Review Aug 2026

Not All Attention Is Equal: A Quantitative Survey of the EEI Trade-off

This survey traces attention from Bahdanau-Luong alignment through the Transformer and into vision architectures, and reviews fixed and learned sparse attention, linear attention, IO-aware exact algorithms including FlashAttention, and state-space alternatives including Mamba.

Aditya Singh · 0 citations

Preprint Aug 2026

Respect Your Zero-Shot Uncertainty: Conservative Calibration for Test-Time-Adapted Vision-Language Models

It is shown that TTA can increase confidence and reduce entropy even when the top-1 prediction and its correctness remain unchanged, a failure mode the authors term prediction-preserving sharpening, and proposed Zero-Shot-Anchored Entropy Calibration (ZAEC), a label-free post-hoc method that uses zero-shot entropy as a sample-specific uncertainty reference.

Jingyan Jiang, Yaru Sun, Xiao Chen et al. · 0 citations

Jul 2026

Small Vision-Language Models Know When They Are Wrong But Cannot Say So: A Two-Model Study of Stated versus Internal Confidence Under Realistic Image Degradation

It is concluded that small VLMs encode usable self-knowledge that their verbalized output does not express, that internal probability is therefore the better deferral signal in constrained deployment, and that neither signal should be trusted under severe low-light conditions.

M. M. Asif Ferdous · arXiv.org · 0 citations