Groc-PO: Grounded Context Preference Optimization for Truthful Multimodal LLMs

Despite the rapid progress of Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs), they still suffer from untruthfulness issues, such as visual hallucinations, content fabrication, and unfaithful reasoning, which substantially undermine their faithfulness and practical utility. Alignment methods based on human preference, such as Direct Preference Optimization (DPO), have been widely adopted to address these issues. However, multimodal reasoning errors often propagate across stages, and final-answer errors can often be traced to mistakes in early grounding stages, yet standard DPO typically applies preference optimization at the final-answer level. This credit-assignment challenge means that supervision for early grounding stages is indirect rather than stage-specific, making it difficult to suppress error propagation arising from grounding drift and context inconsistency. To address this, we propose Grounded Context Preference Optimization (Groc-PO), a grounded preference optimization framework for MLLMs. We further construct the Grounded Context Preference Dataset (GCPD), organizing multi-stage preference samples around three stages of Object Grounding, Contextual Grounding, and Grounded Reasoning, to capture the formation, integration, and utilization of grounded context. By introducing more explicit preference supervision over multiple grounded stages, Groc-PO strengthens context-dependent reasoning and mitigates cross-stage error propagation. Extensive experiments show that, compared with standard DPO and other strong baselines, Groc-PO achieves improved performance in hallucination mitigation, faithful reasoning, and overall reliability, supporting the value of more explicit grounded supervision for trustworthy multimodal reasoning.

The Ebb and Flow of Multimodal Focus: Scheduling Visual Relay Windows for Grounded VLM Reasoning

Vision-language models increasingly succeed on multimodal reasoning benchmarks, yet their visual evidence often becomes unstable once it enters the language stack, weakening evidence-grounded reasoning. To understand this fragility, we examine the internal dynamics of VLMs through a mechanistic lens and uncover a stable three-stage redistribution of multimodal attention focus across depth: an early question-conditioned organization, a critical middle visual-dominant relay, and a late return to answer formation. We operationalize the middle phase as the Visual Relay Window (VRW), and show that its geometry varies with task demand, is causally tied to grounded generation, and distinguishes unsupported answers from stronger reasoning trajectories. Guided by this internal rhythm, we propose TRACE, a task-adaptive inference-time control framework with lightweight trained modules. It reshapes relay allocation during prefill and preserves assembled visual support after handoff during decoding. Across four open-weight VLM backbones and seven benchmarks, TRACE delivers large gains on grounding-sensitive settings, improving them by 4.33 points on average and by up to 6.6 points, while also improving reasoning-heavy tasks. These results show that explicitly controlling multimodal focus across depth offers a unified and effective mechanism for strengthening evidence-grounded multimodal reasoning.

Perception or Prejudice: Can MLLMs Go Beyond First Impressions of Personality?

Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) are increasingly deployed in human-facing roles where personality perception is critical, yet existing benchmarks evaluate this capability solely on numerical Big Five score prediction, leaving open whether models truly perceive personality through behavioral understanding or merely prejudge through superficial pattern matching. We address this gap with three contributions. (i) A new task: we formalize Grounded Personality Reasoning (GPR), which requires MLLMs to anchor each Big Five rating in observable evidence through a chain of rating, reasoning, and grounding. (ii) A new dataset: we release MM-OCEAN (1,104 videos, 5,320 MCQs), produced by a multi-agent pipeline with human verification, with timestamped behavioral observations, evidence-grounded trait analyses, and seven categories of cue-grounding MCQs. (iii) Benchmark and analysis: we design a three-tier evaluation (rating, reasoning, grounding) plus four sample-level failure-mode metrics: Prejudice Rate (PR), Confabulation Rate (CR), Integration-failure Rate (IR), and Holistic-grounding Rate (HR), and benchmark 27 MLLMs (13 closed, 14 open). The analysis uncovers a striking Prejudice Gap: across the field, 51% of correct ratings are not grounded in retrieved cues, and the Holistic-Grounding Rate spans only 0-33.5%. These findings expose a disconnect between getting the right score and reasoning for the right reason, charting a roadmap for grounded social cognition in MLLMs.