Papers
arxiv:2608.08021

Evidence-RL: Towards Evidence-intensive Visual Reasoning

Published on Aug 8
· Submitted by
Haojie Huang
on Aug 11
Authors:
,
,
,
,
,
,
,

Abstract

Counterfactual Evidence Disentanglement improves vision-language model grounding by auditing whether answers causally depend on local visual evidence during reinforcement learning post-training.

Vision-Language Models (VLMs) should answer from concrete image evidence rather than language priors, dataset shortcuts, or irrelevant visual context. Existing perception-aware post-training methods encourage image use through global perturbations or attention proxies, but they do not test whether a sampled answer causally depends on the local evidence that supports it. We propose Counterfactual Evidence Disentanglement (CED), a training-time evidence audit for VLM grounding. For each response, CED neutralizes an object-centric Evidence Region and compares the resulting support drop against matched non-evidence Regions. We combine this signal with answer correctness inside GRPO, rewarding correct answers that rely on the evidence path rather than shortcut or nuisance paths. CED uses weak object-level proposals, requires no question-specific evidence annotations, and adds no inference-time overhead. Across nine public benchmarks and four backbones, CED outperforms prior RL-based post-training methods, with targeted analyses verifying its object-centric signal.

Community

Paper author Paper submitter

Vision-Language Models (VLMs) should answer from concrete image evidence rather than language priors, dataset shortcuts, or irrelevant visual context. Existing perception-aware post-training methods encourage image use through global perturbations or attention proxies, but they do not test whether a sampled answer causally depends on the local evidence that supports it. We propose Counterfactual Evidence Disentanglement (CED), a training-time evidence audit for VLM grounding. For each response, CED neutralizes an object-centric Evidence Region and compares the resulting support drop against matched non-evidence Regions. We combine this signal with answer correctness inside GRPO, rewarding correct answers that rely on the evidence path rather than shortcut or nuisance paths. CED uses weak object-level proposals, requires no question-specific evidence annotations, and adds no inference-time overhead. Across nine public benchmarks and four backbones, CED outperforms prior RL-based post-training methods, with targeted analyses verifying its object-centric signal.

Sign up or log in to comment

Get this paper in your agent:

hf papers read 2608.08021
Don't have the latest CLI?
curl -LsSf https://hf.co/cli/install.sh | bash

Models citing this paper 0

No model linking this paper

Cite arxiv.org/abs/2608.08021 in a model README.md to link it from this page.

Datasets citing this paper 0

No dataset linking this paper

Cite arxiv.org/abs/2608.08021 in a dataset README.md to link it from this page.

Spaces citing this paper 0

No Space linking this paper

Cite arxiv.org/abs/2608.08021 in a Space README.md to link it from this page.

Collections including this paper 0

No Collection including this paper

Add this paper to a collection to link it from this page.