Tri-PvP, an 8,000-sample tri-modal conflict benchmark crossing vision, audio, and text, is introduced, revealing a systematic asymmetry in evidence-form bias: models exhibit a stronger bias toward perceptual signal in vision but propositional in audio.
Abstract
Omni-modal large language models (OLLMs) jointly process vision, audio, and text, yet their modality bias under cross-modal conflict remains underexplored. Existing benchmarks conflate two distinct forms of evidence within a single modality: perceptual signals (e.g., a photograph or recording of a dog) and propositional signals (e.g., the declarative claim"this is a dog"), such that any measured modality bias is inherently confounded with evidence-form bias, precluding clean attribution to either source. To address this, we introduce Tri-PvP, an 8,000-sample tri-modal conflict benchmark crossing vision, audio, and text, where vision and audio each take perceptual or propositional form. Evaluating five OLLMs, we find robust visual bias across most models and evidence-type conditions. Crucially, we reveal a systematic asymmetry in evidence-form bias: models exhibit a stronger bias toward perceptual signal in vision but propositional in audio. Further analyses via layer-wise linear probing and contrastive decoding reveal that modality bias is already linearly decodable from early representation layers and can only be partially mitigated, calling for mitigation strategies beyond surface-level interventions.
Omni-modal assistants must remember not only what users say, but also what they show and convey. Existing long-term memory benchmarks are mostly text-and-image or report a single end-to-end score, so they cannot locate whether evidence is lost when it is represented, retrieved, delivered, or read. We introduce MOSAIC,...
Hong Ting Tsang, Bo-Yi Zhang, Haoyu Huang et al.· 0 citations
Ambiguity is a central feature of natural communication: a sentence, image, or sound may remain underspecified until evidence from the other channels is considered. Yet current multimodal benchmarks mostly test perception, recognition, or reasoning over already determinate inputs, leaving unclear whether omni-modal lar...
Zhaolu Kang, Yi-Di Wang, Yi-Le Li et al.· 0 citations
SCEval (Structure-Corruption Evaluation) a diagnostic evaluation protocol that keeps the question, answer space, and modality channels fixed while applying controlled structural corruptions to text, vision, and audio individually and jointly is introduced.
Zhaolu Kang, Mei-Xin Wu, Yu Xue et al.· 1 citation
Vision-language models must reconcile conflicting text and images. Prior work has characterized the resulting behavior in terms of modality biases--e.g., a"blind faith in text"--but why preferences vary across models, domains, and input conditions remains unclear. We develop a predictive account from a Bayesian perspec...
J. Barua, Kyle Mahowald, William Rudman· 0 citations
Omni-modal large language models (Omni-LLMs) extend LLMs to process heterogeneous modalities (e.g., vision, audio, and IMU signals) alongside language, enabling a broader range of multimodal tasks. Yet we find that these models often fail to express information from non-textual modalities even when they perceive it cor...
Na-Min An, Taekyung Kim, Jaemyung Yu et al.· 0 citations
It is shown that stronger temporal alignment changes answer bias, but do not improve compositional conflict resolution, and that stronger temporal alignment changes answer bias, but do not improve compositional conflict resolution.
A. Sudheer, David Li, Omar Elbanna et al.· 0 citations