MLLM-based embedding models remain limited in compositional retrieval, often failing to distinguish scenes containing the same concepts but different attribute-object bindings. Yet the same backbone can resolve such distinctions when used as a cross-attentive reranker, motivating us to distill its compositional judgments into the embedding model. We propose CORE, which synthesizes candidate lists spanning five compositional matching levels and introduces a Rank-KL objective that trains the embedding model to reproduce the reranker's fine-grained ranking. We further introduce a graded evaluation protocol and compare contrastive learning, pairwise CoSENT, and listwise Rank-KL under the same data and tuning budget. Our comparison shows that both CoSENT and Rank-KL use the multi-level supervision more effectively than contrastive learning, with Rank-KL achieving the strongest overall performance. Across three compositional reasoning benchmarks (COLA, SUGARCREPE++, NEGBENCH), CORE-RERANKER-8B achieves an 82.7% total average, outperforming Jina-Reranker by 10.7 points, while CORE-EMBED-8B achieves the best total average (0.666) among all evaluated embedding models. The improvements transfer to the MCMR benchmark without sacrificing retrieval performance on COCO and Flickr30K.
Despite the impressive progress of recent MLLMs on spatio-temporal video grounding (STVG), existing evaluations and training data focus primarily on simple queries. They largely overlook the compositional queries prevalent in real-world scenarios, where a target must be disambiguated by jointly reasoning about its attributes and relations to other entities. To bridge this gap, we propose Compositional Spatio-Temporal Video Grounding (CompSTVG), a task that requires models to process complex textual queries where every intertwined attribute and relational cue is essential for disambiguation. To facilitate this task at scale, we build a synthetic data engine that leverages a spatio-temporal scene graph as a difficulty measure and casts difficulty-controlled query synthesis as a constraint programming problem, producing difficulty-graded data for both evaluation and training. Built on this engine, we introduce STVG-CompBench, a benchmark stratified by explicit difficulty levels that jointly capture temporal complexity and spatial interference. Evaluating 11 representative STVG models on STVG-CompBench reveals that current models perform poorly on compositional queries, exhibiting a sharp performance drop that is typically obscured by overall dataset-level averages. We further construct synthetic training data and propose CurrSTVG, a curriculum reinforcement learning framework that delivers consistent gains, with the largest improvements observed on the most challenging compositional queries.
Ryan Thomas Noonan, Linxi Zhao, Menghan Xu +6cs.CL cs.AI cs.LG
Retrieval-augmented methods improve factual accuracy by grounding language models in external knowledge, but retrieving over unstructured text often introduces irrelevant context and offers limited control over the retrieved information. Structured knowledge bases offer a more controllable alternative, yet they are expensive to construct and often brittle to reason over. To address these limitations, we propose KBevo: a co-evolving framework that jointly learns to construct a structured knowledge base and reason over it for knowledge-intensive question answering. By optimizing both components end-to-end with QA outcome rewards, our method enables reasoning success to directly improve the quality of the constructed knowledge base. This leads to larger, better-connected knowledge structures with higher answer reachability, while also improving compositional factual reasoning and controllability compared to standard retrieval baselines.
Reasoning-augmented text-to-image models such as GoT-R1 emit an explicit textual plan - object names, attributes, and bounding boxes - before generating image tokens. When such a model fails a compositional prompt, is the plan wrong, or is the plan right and the decoder unfaithful? Because the plan is machine-readable it can be edited before decoding, which makes the two separable. We first validate the ruler. Swapping the two bounding boxes inside the model's own chain demonstrably flips the generated layout: detector-based accuracy falls 0.75 -> 0.48 (p<1e-3), while a widely used VQA-based spatial metric rises. A five-rater human study agrees with the detector on 81% of items and with the VQA judge on 57%. All spatial results therefore use geometric scoring. Under sound measurement the decoder is a faithful executor: 94% of generated layouts realize the planned relation, and object-box binding survives reordering of the plan's object segments. The planner is the bottleneck. It writes wrong relations for phrasing-dependent reasons - 98% accuracy on "left" against 54% on "right" for semantically identical layouts, a raster-order bias we isolate with a mention-order control - and cluttered geometry that the decoder faithfully reproduces. Editing the plan therefore fixes the image without retraining: symbolic verification with resampling gives +5.0 points (p<1e-3), minimal in-place repair +6.0 (p=.02), rewriting only box geometry +10.7 (p<1e-4), and replacing the plan outright +13.3 (p=1e-4). Gains are indifferent to the plan's prose style and to its likelihood under the planner, but not to its geometry. Modular planner-decoder designs are therefore viable, provided the plan is internally consistent: box-text contradictions induce object duplication and identity fusion. We release the plan-fidelity evaluation protocol, all plans, and 12k generated images.
We introduce ClosureBench, a constructive benchmark for compositional graph-relational reasoning with programmatically verified ground truth. Unlike fixed-test-set benchmarks vulnerable to data contamination, ClosureBench generates instances on demand: each task's reference answer is computed by executing a program in the Ein tensor-logic language, ensuring machine-verified correctness. The benchmark spans 26 task categories at three compositional levels (L1-L3), with difficulty controlled along three independent axes: graph size, edge density, and query depth. We evaluate models from 1.5B open weights to frontier systems (o3, GPT-4.1, Gemini 2.5, Claude Sonnet 4) and report three findings. First, because the benchmark can always supply fresh instances, it measures memorisation directly: a model fine-tuned on a fixed test set shows a 19.3 percentage-point gap between its accuracy on seen and on fresh instances, which a static test set cannot reveal. We scope this to supervised fine-tuning on answer pairs, not pretraining contamination. Second, accuracy falls as graph size and query depth increase, and the two interact: models misread the graph from its natural-language description and then reason correctly over the wrong graph, so even the strongest frontier model degrades from atomic to compositional queries. This bottleneck is a property of the reasoning rather than the input format: it persists when the graph is given as a JSON edge list or an adjacency matrix instead of prose. Third, a 4B model fine-tuned to emit executable programs rather than answers stays nearly flat across compositional levels and approaches frontier accuracy (94.3% on held-out instances) at a fraction of the token cost. This holds for two program targets, Ein and Python+NetworkX, so it is a property of verified program synthesis rather than of one language.
Andrei Cristian Popescu, Haitz Sáez de Ocáriz Borde, Pietro Liòcs.AI cs.LG
Looped language models have shown promising results on reasoning benchmarks, yet their potential for agentic tool use remains largely unexplored. We study this question in compositional tool-calling settings, where models must coordinate multiple API calls, maintain intermediate state, and preserve dependencies across tool interactions. We evaluate native and retrofitted looped language models on API-Bank, BFCL, and NESTful, comparing looped and non-looped models trained under matched supervised fine-tuning recipes and varying recurrent depth at inference time. In controlled experiments, recurrent computation generally benefits compositional and dependency-aware tool use, while providing smaller and more model-dependent gains on isolated API invocation. Accuracy on multi-step tool use generally increases with recurrent depth; adaptive inference, however, achieves a more favorable compute-performance trade-off by allocating additional computation only when needed. Our results suggest that looped language models are a promising architecture for agentic systems that require reliable planning, coordination, and execution of compositional tool use workflows.
We introduce Mobius-v0, an architecture that comprises a globally shared Memory (FFN) that stores knowledge vectors and multiple Reasoners (Self-Attn) that iteratively achieve compositional reasoning. Using hidden states as cache and carrier, reasoners repeatedly query memory for required knowledge-vectors, while the knowledge is transmitted back to reasoning operators. Through this knowledge-reasoning-separation architecture, Mobius achieves better knowledge compression and reasoning efficiency. Built upon Mobius-v0 architecture: 1) Our 7B model trained-from-scratch achieves similar downstream score as a 7B Transformer baseline with 62.6% of baseline's training data. 2) Our Intern-S2-Mobius, continually-pretrained from Qwen3.5-35B, achieves similar downstream score while delivering nearly 4x end-to-end inference speedup.
Large language models often fail when answer options require combining atomic judgments under explicit logical operators, even when they judge the individual atoms correctly. We study compound options connected by AND, OR, and NEITHER/NOR, introducing a framework that decomposes each option into atomic answers and scores contrastive hypotheses about each one, so the model never sees a compound option. An operator-constrained integer linear program then composes the calibrated scores into a single prediction. We evaluate on LOGICAL-COMMONSENSEQA and introduce LOGICAL-SATA, a reading-comprehension benchmark derived from SATA-Bench. Our framework improves Macro-F1 from 48.3 to 77.0 on the human-validated LOGICAL-COMMONSENSEQA split and from 47.0 to 75.6 on LOGICAL-SATA, with the largest gains on NEITHER/NOR.
Sultan Alshehri, Zhantao Yang, Han Zhang +1cs.CV cs.CL cs.LG
Dual-encoder vision-language models (VLMs) expose a similarity interface that enables zero-shot retrieval but fails compositional constraints: queries like "umbrella and no person" retrieve images containing both, even when concept detection is reliable. We trace this to an interface-level Bag-of-Concepts effect, where similarity scores approximate mean pooling of concept evidence regardless of operators. Although operator-dependent signals exist in text embeddings, they are too weak or misaligned to affect rankings. Fine-tuning does not reliably resolve this failure because the dominant bottleneck is how similarity aggregates evidence rather than what encoders represent. We propose factored inference, which separates evidence extraction from constraint execution, and introduce LCSE (Logic-Constrained Score Editing), a training-free method that executes constraints externally using concept scores from frozen encoders. We also introduce FACTOR-Bench, where LCSE achieves 85.5% accuracy versus 73.2% for the best fine-tuned baseline, 90.7% when applied to SigLIP 2, and improves NegBench COCO MCQ accuracy from 27.2% to 65.2% while preserving retrieval performance.
Large language models and LLM-based agents are widely used as personal chat assistants, enterprise copilots, and autonomous workflow agents. In all these applications, memory (the ability to retain, access, and reason over information accumulated over long contexts and multiple interactions) plays a crucial role in determining the reliability of any agent. We introduce RECON (Reasoning over Extended Contexts with Obfuscated Narratives), a benchmark for evaluating compositional reasoning over long contexts. RECON spans 24 case files across three domains (criminal, medical, and financial), each ranging from 50k to 100k tokens, and tests agents on six memory intensive tasks: reconstructing multi-hop evidence chains, propagating cascading invalidations, resolving source conflicts, counterfactual reasoning, satisfying temporal constraints, and temporal fact retrieval. Recent memory benchmarks evaluate whether agents can retrieve scattered facts or detect if a fact has changed whereas RECON evaluates what happens after the change, whether agents can trace which downstream conclusions are affected, which survive through independent support, and how alternative timelines would have unfolded. Our evaluation reveals substantial limitations across current architectures: even the strongest non-Oracle system reaches only 22.4% Accuracy, with retrieval and reasoning each surfacing as challenges.
Azwar Abdulsalam, Nishil Patel, Andrew Saxecs.AI cs.CL
Does RL post-training merely amplify primitive skills already latent in a base model, or can it compose primitive skills into new higher-level strategies? We study this question in a fully observable rewrite-grammar environment where the pretraining distribution is known and every generated rewrite can be audited. A Transformer is pretrained on primitive symbol-rewrite chains and post-trained on a Trace-based reasoning task with only a binary final-answer reward. RL solves held-out problems that remain rarely solved by the pretrained model even under much larger sampling budgets, while rejection fine-tuning improves early but plateaus. Trace analysis shows that RL reorganizes primitive competence through a phased compositional mechanism: it first strengthens primitive reductions, then discovers valid composed procedures. These include sequential compositions, which collapse ordered chains of primitive contractions, and parallel compositions, which combine independent primitive contractions in a single step. The composed procedures are not isolated samples; they are reused and consolidated into a stable repertoire. Comparing RL with rejection fine-tuning shows that the key difference is not exploration volume but selectivity: RFT produces many shortcut-like rewrites, much of them invalid, whereas RL concentrates exploration into valid reusable structure. Pretraining ablations show that the emergence of compositional strategies is gated not by primitive exposure alone, but by whether pretraining organizes primitive competence into reduction procedures that RL can later compress. The base model provides weak procedural ingredients; RL builds them into reliable higher-level strategies.
Data refinement involves executing multi-step recipes over evolving text states, where both composition and execution order of processing operators determine the outcome. While existing benchmarks either isolate text editing or entangle it with code and tool execution, it remains unclear whether LLMs can directly and faithfully execute these compositional, order-sensitive data refinement recipes. To fill this gap, we introduce CDR-Bench, a comprehensive benchmark featuring 3,462 high-quality tasks spanning four real-world data refinement domains and 29 distinct operators. Our benchmark evaluates models across atomic, order-agnostic, and order-sensitive settings, leveraging deterministic reference outputs to enable exact evaluation. Experiments on 10+ state-of-the-art LLMs reveal consistent failure patterns: performance degrades sharply in compositional settings, and order-sensitive recipe success collapses. These findings underline that current LLMs lack the procedural faithfulness required for reliable compositional data refinement.
Conventional vision-language models are largely object-centric, focusing on detecting and describing individual entities. In safety-critical X-ray baggage screening, however, threat often emerges not from a single object but from the functional compatibility of spatially dispersed components, such as batteries, detonators, and explosive charges. We formalize this setting as \emph{compositional threat reasoning}, where risk is modeled as a relational property of grounded regions rather than an independent detection outcome. We introduce \textbf{Falcon}, a multimodal framework that abstracts segmentation-aware region features into a structured safety state capturing component presence, pairwise functional compatibility, and scene-level risk. This structured representation is injected into the language model as an explicit intermediate interface, encouraging relationally consistent and safety-aware reasoning. To evaluate this problem, we present \textbf{Falcon-X}, a benchmark that unifies dense grounding with structured supervision over component completeness and risk inference in cluttered X-ray imagery. Experiments show that while existing multimodal models adapt to appearance, they struggle with compositional safety reasoning. Falcon improves functional grounding and produces more coherent threat assessments, establishing compositional safety reasoning as a distinct evaluation paradigm for multimodal systems.
Knowledge graph embedding (KGE) models predict single-hop links well but have no mechanism for zero-shot compositional queries: multi-hop questions whose relation chains never appeared during training. Holographic Reduced Representations (HRR), which bind and unbind symbols via circular convolution, are a theoretically attractive candidate, since binding is approximately invertible and associative. We test whether this promise holds. We study two holographic memory variants, real-valued HRR and phase-only Fourier HRR (FHRR), each with a modern Hopfield cleanup, on FB15k-237 over five seeds. Four findings follow. First, both are competitive single-hop retrievers (filtered MRR 0.358 +/- 0.002 for HRR, 0.350 +/- 0.021 for FHRR). Second, neither composes zero-shot: accuracy stays at chance across all cleanup temperatures. Third, the main contribution, we localise the failure mechanistically. A hop-1 probe shows the memory recovers the correct intermediate entity with high fidelity (MRR 0.896 +/- 0.002 for HRR), yet composition still fails even with a verified-correct intermediate. A second probe shows why: posing the ground-truth second-hop fact as a standalone atomic query, bypassing composition entirely, already recovers it at only 0.26 to 0.48x average atomic accuracy, uniformly across relation fan-out. The bottleneck is not the bind-unbind algebra or the cleanup; it is that facts compositional chains pass through are intrinsically harder for the superposed memory to retrieve, a capacity and interference effect present already at a single hop. Fourth, we prove (Lemma 4.1) that FHRR's softmax cleanup is not phase-equivariant, compounding the primary failure on the minority of chains where hop-1 itself errs. Fixing zero-shot composition requires improving retrieval capacity under superposition, not just redesigning the cleanup.
Sarrah R. Mikhail Leung, Taehan Kim, Jeongbin Parkcs.LG
Reinforcement learning from verifiable rewards (RLVR) has driven rapid progress in mathematical and code reasoning, but when extended to science, existing benchmarks do not decompose what generalizes: do gains reflect structural transfer, property transfer, or memorization? We introduce Mat-Pref, a benchmark of 10,837 ionic-substitution questions across 11 inorganic structure families, grounded in density functional theory calculations from the Materials Project, with three evaluation splits that isolate in-distribution performance, generalization to entirely held-out structure families, and cross-property transfer: applying band-gap reasoning to hosts seen during training only through formation-energy supervision. Four zero-shot frontier models (70-671B parameters) remain in the 33-54% range on every split, confirming that scale alone does not resolve the compositional chemical reasoning this task demands. A two-stage pipeline of supervised fine-tuning followed by Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO) lifts Qwen3-8B to 65.2% in-distribution and 71.6% on held-out families, exceeding zero-shot Qwen3-235B by over 20 percentage points on both structural-generalization splits. Self-consistency sampling shows that the SFT policy can already produce correct answers but cannot reliably surface them as the modal response; GRPO reshapes the distribution so that correct answers become modal rather than merely reachable, and this sharper commitment is visible mechanistically: logit lens analysis reveals a ${\sim}$20pp advantage in answer crystallization at the critical decision layer. We formalize this observation as a distractor-permutation consistency metric under which GRPO narrows the gap between lenient scoring (at least one permutation correct) and strict scoring (all permutations correct) from 24.0 to 14.3 percentage points.
Sajad Movahedi, Vera Milovanović, Shlomo Libo Feigin +5cs.AI
Looped architectures provide an inductive bias toward learning step-by-step procedures for tasks that require compositional reasoning. The number of effective layers reached by looping determines the quality of the solution these models find. Like deep architectures, looped architectures are prone to a signal propagation problem induced by depth as the halting decision is postponed. In this paper, we address this signal propagation issue using pre-norm layers and residual scaling. Building on these architectural modifications, we propose FPRM, a Transformer-based Fixed-Point Reasoning Model that uses fixed-point convergence as an end-to-end halting mechanism in a looped architecture. We show that fixed-point halting allows FPRM to adapt its compute to task difficulty. FPRM is effective on common reasoning benchmarks, namely Sudoku, Maze, state-tracking, and ARC-AGI.
Aggregate accuracy benchmarks conceal a systematic structure in how large language models fail at electronic health record (EHR) question answering: questions requiring more inferential steps produce disproportionately more errors. Motivated by theoretical results on transformer compositionality limits, we introduce a pre-specified hop-count taxonomy -- the number of distinct reasoning steps required to answer a clinical question from an EHR -- as a principled predictor of model failure. We annotate 313 clinician-generated MedAlign EHR question-answer pairs across four hop levels and evaluate 301 questions in a within-model ablation (claude-sonnet-4-6, zero-shot vs. extended thinking) and cross-architecture replications (gpt-4o and gpt-5.4-2026-03-05, zero-shot). All three models, spanning two providers and two OpenAI generations (GPT-4 and GPT-5), show monotone accuracy decline with hop count: Claude Sonnet zero-shot falls from 30.6% (hop=1) to 17.6% (hop=4) (Cochran-Armitage z=-2.30, p=0.011; OR per hop 0.72, 95% CI [0.56,0.92], p=0.008); GPT-4o replicates this (37.8% to 14.7%; OR 0.58 [0.45,0.75], p<0.001); and gpt-5.4-2026-03-05 confirms it (37.8% to 23.5%; OR 0.80 [0.66,0.98], p=0.027). A pre-specified context-sufficiency audit shows higher-hop questions are not differentially disadvantaged by EHR truncation (answerability 93-95% at hops 2-4 vs. 79% at hop=1), so the decline reflects compositional reasoning difficulty. Extended thinking did not significantly flatten the accuracy-depth curve across three reasoning conditions, and thinking-token usage scaled with hop count (r=0.31, p<0.0001), consistent with the predicted O(k) computational requirement. Hop count is thus a theory-motivated, cross-architecture predictor of large-language-model error on EHR question answering, with direct implications for deployment risk stratification of clinical AI.
Vision-Language Models (VLMs) are AI systems that process both images and text, yet they often struggle with compositional visual reasoning questions that require chaining multiple steps together, such as identifying objects, counting them, and comparing the results. Existing approaches improve this reasoning by training models on human-written step-by-step explanations, but creating these annotations is expensive and difficult to scale. We propose a self-questioning framework that trains a VLM to break visual questions into smaller sub-questions and answer each one before producing a final response, using a reinforcement learning algorithm called Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO). The model is never shown examples of how to decompose questions, it discovers this behavior on its own, guided by a reward signal that scores whether the output contains sub-questions and whether the final answer is correct. We apply this framework to a 3-billion-parameter model, training on both synthetic scenes of geometric shapes (CLEVR) and real-world photographs (A-OKVQA). On A-OKVQA, both self-questioning and standard reinforcement learning substantially improve accuracy over the untrained model (52.2% and 51.6% vs. 46.8%). We introduce the first self-questioning VLM by rewarding not only the final answer like standard RL but additionally for generating intermediate sub-questions, enabling it to discover compositional decomposition strategies. These results suggest that teaching AI systems to ask themselves intermediate questions is a promising strategy for complex visual reasoning, particularly when the difficulty of a question warrants explicit step-by-step decomposition.
Jennifer Meng Lu, Ruochen Zhang, Isabelle Lee +3cs.AI
Humans cannot always intuit what scenarios are most challenging to LLMs. Hoping to capture challenging edge cases, developers either design problems to be difficult for humans or curate extensive benchmarks. What if we could instead anticipate which scenarios a model will fail on? In this paper, we use an LLM's representational geometry to predict which concept combinations it will fail on. We attribute this compositional failure to interference between salient features. In tasks that require systematic composition - toy programmatic settings, multihop reasoning, multilingual factual recall - we find that when a pair of concepts is encoded near-orthogonally, the model reliably composes them. When their linear encodings are close, producing interference, the model fails to compose them. Our method reliably anticipates failure modes across different compositional tasks, without evaluating specific inputs. These results lay the groundwork to use representational geometry to identify high-risk examples, construct targeted stress tests, and provide a scalable foundation for active learning in real-world deployment.
Question decomposition, i.e. breaking a complex query into simpler sub-queries whose answers are composed to produce a final answer, is a widely used strategy for improving LLM reasoning, yet it currently lacks a rigorous mathematical foundation. In this paper, we propose operads, mathematical structures that model many-in, one-out operations and compositions thereof, as a natural framework for describing question decomposition. We define the questions operad $Q$, in which operations correspond to question templates and composition corresponds to substitution of sub-answers, and show how QA models can be interpreted as algebras over $Q$. Beyond reframing existing practice, this operadic perspective points toward new methods, in particular a notion of operadic consistency, which measures whether a QA model's answers agree across the partial collapses of a question decomposition tree. Empirical evaluation of operadic consistency is reported in our companion paper (Bottman, Liu, and Richardson, 2026), which finds it strongly correlated with accuracy across twelve LLMs and four multi-hop QA datasets and outperforming standard temperature-based self-consistency baselines. We argue that operads are the natural mathematical home for question decomposition, and that invariants such as operadic consistency open new directions for analyzing and improving the reliability of multi-step reasoning.
Moshiur Farazi, Sameera Ramasinghe, Mahbub Ahmed Turza +1cs.CV
Vision-Language Models (VLMs) struggle with compositional reasoning that requires understanding inter-object relationships. A natural remedy is to inject explicit scene graph triplets $\langle s, p, o \rangle$ from an off-the-shelf scene graph generator (SGG), but we show this backfires: discrete text labels collide with the continuous visual modality, degrading GQA accuracy from 60.38\% to 58.86\%. We propose \textbf{HyperVis}, which bypasses the SGG semantic bottleneck entirely. From $N$ class-agnostic region proposals, we compute a dense $O(N^2)$ visual relation tensor via spatially-biased cross-attention, project it onto a Lorentz hyperboloid, and enforce hierarchy through spatial physics, namely IoA-driven entailment cones and exterior-angle repulsion. We discover that HyperVis contributes in two complementary ways: (1) as a \emph{training-time regularizer}, the hyperbolic relational losses shape LoRA representations that improve generative VQA (GQA 61.03\% vs.\ 57.21\% for LoRA fine-tuning without relational losses, recovering and surpassing the baseline); and (2) as an \emph{inference-time relational encoder}, hyperbolic prefix tokens boost discriminative compositional scoring (SugarCrepe 79.94\%, $+$6.25pp over baseline). The learned curvature stabilises at $κ{=}4.0$, an order of magnitude above prior hyperbolic VLMs where $κ$ typically collapses toward zero, indicating that continuous visual features genuinely require the exponential volume of strongly curved space. A controlled Euclidean ablation confirms this decomposition: the relational pipeline regularises LoRA comparably in flat space (GQA 60.81\%), but the compositionality gain is specifically hyperbolic (SugarCrepe $+$4.58pp over Euclidean), with entailment loss ${\sim}6{\times}$ higher in Euclidean training. Codes are available at TBA.
Compositional visual question answering (VQA) represents a challenging yet fundamental task that requires models to comprehend novel combinations of previously learned concepts. The current methods often overlook the disentanglement of underlying concepts and are restricted in terms of their ability to effectively capture the compositional variation mechanism. Moreover, the state-of-the-art techniques depend on additional clues for training, which is not feasible in real-world VQA scenarios. To address these issues, in this paper, we introduce a novel Disentanglement-based EquivAriant Learning (DEAL) framework for compositional VQA, which is guided exclusively by ground-truth answers. In DEAL, we employ causality-inspired interventions to disentangle concepts derived from visual and textual inputs within a re-encoding framework. Based on the principle of equivariance, we subsequently perform a compositional transformation on the inference input and impose the equivariant constraint on the output to augment the compositional reasoning capacity of the model. Comprehensive experiments conducted on the benchmark CLEVR-CoGenT and GQA-SGL datasets validate the superiority of our proposed DEAL approach over the existing state-of-the-art methods for compositional VQA tasks in both visual and linguistic generalization settings.