Paper detail

Predicting When to Trust Vision-Language Models for Spatial Reasoning

Vision-Language Models (VLMs) demonstrate impressive capabilities across multimodal tasks, yet exhibit systematic spatial reasoning failures, achieving only 49% (CLIP) to 54% (BLIP-2) accuracy on basic directional relationships. For safe deployment in robotics and autonomous systems, we need to predict when to trust VLM spatial predictions rather than accepting all outputs. We propose a vision-based confidence estimation framework that validates VLM predictions through independent geometric verification using object detection. Unlike text-based approaches relying on self-assessment, our method fuses four signals via gradient boosting: geometric alignment between VLM claims and coordinates, spatial ambiguity from overlap, detection quality, and VLM internal uncertainty. We achieve 0.674 AUROC on BLIP-2 (34.0% improvement over text-based baselines) and 0.583 AUROC on CLIP (16.1% improvement), generalizing across generative and classification architectures. Our framework enables selective prediction: at 60% target accuracy, we achieve 61.9% coverage versus 27.6% baseline (2.2x improvement) on BLIP-2. Feature analysis reveals vision-based signals contribute 87.4% of model importance versus 12.7% from VLM confidence, validating that external geometric verification outperforms self-assessment. We demonstrate reliable scene graph construction where confidence-based pruning improves precision from 52.1% to 78.3% while retaining 68.2% of edges.

preprint2026arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.