Ana Estrada-Real, Lydia Alapatt, Christoph Busch +1cs.CV
Responsible deployment of face verification systems requires more than accurate decisions: systems should also provide interpretable and auditable evidence that enables users to understand, assess, and challenge their decisions. Vision-language models (VLMs) provide a promising foundation for explainable face recognition by combining visual analysis with natural-language reasoning. However, relying on a single model may further limit the decision accuracy as well as provided explanations. This work therefore investigates whether multiple VLMs can be combined to improve recognition accuracy, and to enrich the explanations associated with those decisions. This work evaluates four VLMs as standalone face verification systems and subsequently proposes a fusion framework, where two source models provide similarity scores and textual justifications and a third VLM acts as a decider model. Four different fusion scenarios are considered, progressively providing the decider model with scores, justifications, face images, and combinations of these modalities. Overall, the findings suggest that the value of multi-VLM fusion extends beyond recognition performance. VLMs can provide complementary justifications and perspectives that enable richer explanations of face recognition decisions, supporting greater transparency, auditability, and error analysis. This is relevant to the development of responsible explainable face verification systems, where users and operators should be able to understand not only the final decision but also the evidence and potential sources underlying it. The proposed multimodal VLM, which combines decision scores, explanations, and face images, achieves higher recognition accuracy than state-of-the-art VLMs and domain-specific face recognition models, while also providing fused explanations that are expected to be more robust than those generated by individual VLMs.
Training-free fusion of heterogeneous multimodal large language models (MLLMs) provides a direct route for cross-scale capability transfer, yet improvements in aggregate performance do not reveal what a smaller model actually inherits. Existing studies are largely designed and evaluated on limited task sets or aggregate metrics; as evaluation expands to broader task collections, whether different capabilities can transfer across scales remains poorly understood. To investigate this question, we introduce Cross-Scale Directional Parameter Injection (CDPI), a simple linear probe to analyze cross-scale knowledge transfer during heterogeneous fusion. A local theoretical analysis indicates that knowledge transfer selectivity is determined at first order by capability-dependent responses to a shared injection direction, while second-order curvature effects constrain the effective transfer regime. Across four Qwen3-VL model pairs and twelve multimodal benchmarks, our experiments reveal a consistent pattern of selectivity: gains concentrate on reasoning, particularly high-level reasoning, whereas perception performance remains close to that of the original target model. Component-wise ablations further show that high-level reasoning gains arise primarily from the language model, while ratio analysis finds that positive selective transfer occurs mainly in the small-ratio regime. These findings recast cross-scale heterogeneous MLLM fusion as selective language-side reasoning transfer within a narrow, low-interference regime, rather than broad capability inheritance.