Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

NL-Eye: Abductive NLI for Images

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2410.02613 v1 pith:6G6EOQJJ submitted 2024-10-03 cs.CV cs.AIcs.CL

NL-Eye: Abductive NLI for Images

classification cs.CV cs.AIcs.CL
keywords nl-eyevlmsabductiveimagesreasoningvisualcapabilitieslanguage
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

Will a Visual Language Model (VLM)-based bot warn us about slipping if it detects a wet floor? Recent VLMs have demonstrated impressive capabilities, yet their ability to infer outcomes and causes remains underexplored. To address this, we introduce NL-Eye, a benchmark designed to assess VLMs' visual abductive reasoning skills. NL-Eye adapts the abductive Natural Language Inference (NLI) task to the visual domain, requiring models to evaluate the plausibility of hypothesis images based on a premise image and explain their decisions. NL-Eye consists of 350 carefully curated triplet examples (1,050 images) spanning diverse reasoning categories: physical, functional, logical, emotional, cultural, and social. The data curation process involved two steps - writing textual descriptions and generating images using text-to-image models, both requiring substantial human involvement to ensure high-quality and challenging scenes. Our experiments show that VLMs struggle significantly on NL-Eye, often performing at random baseline levels, while humans excel in both plausibility prediction and explanation quality. This demonstrates a deficiency in the abductive reasoning capabilities of modern VLMs. NL-Eye represents a crucial step toward developing VLMs capable of robust multimodal reasoning for real-world applications, including accident-prevention bots and generated video verification.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Understanding Space Is Rocket Science -- Only Top Reasoning Models Can Solve Spatial Understanding Tasks

    cs.CV 2025-09 conditional novelty 6.0

    A new contrastive real-image benchmark shows most vision-language models fail spatial relation tasks, while chain-of-thought reasoning models approach human-level accuracy.