Real-world situation appearances can deviate from their underlying physical states, challenging the reliability of multimodal large language models (MLLMs) in practical applications. In this paper, we term this phenomenon situational illusions and investigate: (1) how MLLMs perform under such illusions, and (2) how to mitigate the limitations. We first develop a comprehensive where-what-how taxonomy that characterizes where situational illusions occur, what targets they take, and how they arise. Building on this taxonomy, we introduce MSIBench, a benchmark designed to assess the discrimination, understanding, and reasoning capabilities of MLLMs under situational illusions. Evaluations of 27 model configurations reveal that current MLLMs are highly vulnerable to these illusions and exhibit 6 typical failure modes related to visual observation, grounding, and reasoning. To mitigate the limitations, we build on the core idea of systematically inspecting and reasoning over visual evidence for contextual understanding, developing prompting for closed-source models and supervised fine-tuning for open-source models, respectively. These two simple yet effective methods improve model performances by 20% at most, suggesting a practical path toward more reliable multimodal perception and reasoning in complex real-world environments.
Chart-to-code generation is commonly trained with supervised fine-tuning on reference plotting scripts, implicitly treating the gold code as a fully observable target. We argue that this assumption is often invalid: many chart programs contain latent raw variables that cannot be uniquely recovered from the rendered image. For example, a boxplot exposes summary statistics rather than original samples, a pie chart reveals proportions rather than arbitrary raw values, and a histogram shows bin-level mass rather than individual observations. Supervising models to reproduce such non-identifiable quantities encourages hallucination and over-specified code generation. We introduce Observation-Aligned supervision, a rewriting framework that replaces latent raw-data targets with quantities constrained by the visual observation: box statistics for boxplots, wedge percentages for pie charts, and bin weights for histograms. Applying this framework to chart-to-code training data from two sources, we obtain the Observation-Aligned supervision target data. Experiments across multiple VLMs on ChartMimic and ChartX demonstrate consistent improvements in observable value recovery, including under both-executable evaluation. Our results suggest that improving chart-to-code models requires not only more data or advanced learning objectives or algorithms, but also supervision targets that respect what is identifiable from the chart image.
Two-stage post-training -- a Stage-1 warm-start (supervised fine-tuning, SFT, or on-policy distillation, OPD) followed by Stage-2 reinforcement learning (RL) -- is increasingly used for vision-language models (VLMs). We ask what Stage-1 actually controls in a small-data study using Qwen2.5-VL-7B with a same-modality 72B VLM teacher for OPD. First, the three warm-starts reach a narrow $53$--$54\%$ band on Geometry3K internal validation, consistent with the narrow range reported by recent specialized methods; this setup provides little evidence that Stage-1 changes the in-domain endpoint. Second, a matched-recipe, early-stopped SFT improves out-of-domain MathVista by $+2.1$ points, reversing the $-9.5$-point drop of an over-trained variant. The clearest difference is the \emph{entropy regime}: OPD enters RL with substantially higher policy entropy than either SFT initialization, and the separation remains visible through the available trajectories. At the in-domain initialization, OPD also has higher answer diversity and pass@16 ($+2.0$ to $+5.2$ points over SFT), although problem-level bootstrap intervals show that the smaller contrast is uncertain. The advantage is absent after RL (endpoint pass@16 values within $1.1$ points) and on MathVista (six models within $1.2$ points). Our contribution is therefore a bounded empirical characterization: Stage-1 is strongly associated with the entropy regime in this setup, but the downstream payoff is small, localized, and not evidence that OPD is a better RL warm-start.