The Illusion of Visual Tool-Use: A Causal Audit of Thinking with Images
The "thinking-with-images" paradigm equips multimodal LLMs with active visual operations such as crop-and-zoom. However, models using these operations often achieve only marginal or negative gains over direct inference at substantially higher token cost. They may also repeatedly crop irrelevant regions and fail on questions that direct inference answers correctly. We ask whether the returned visual evidence causally affects the answer. To answer this question, we formulate visual tool-use as a causal graph that separates observation-mediated paths from action-induced shortcuts. We then audit it through interventions at the three levels: policy (comparing tool-use with direct inference), trajectory (corrupting all observations during rollout), and step (counterfactually replacing one individual observation under a fixed prefix). Our step-level estimand, Visual Evidence Gain, isolates the contribution of each returned observation. Across six representative models and five fine-grained perception benchmarks, we uncover policy miscalibration with two failure modes. In Calling Without Looking, returned observations have no causal effect on the answer. In Looking Without Planning, observations are informative but the call schedule is incoherent. A trajectory-level diagnostic decomposes the policy-level accuracy gain and shows that the gain is concentrated in a Calibrated minority. We term this discrepancy the illusion of visual tool-use: despite aggregate accuracy gains, visual tool-use is not causally effective across a broad range of rollouts. The code is available at https://github.com/OpenCausaLab/CauAudit.
Code (0)
등록된 구현이 없습니다.
Similar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
Are UFOs Driving Innovation? The Illusion of Causality in Large Language Models
Illusions of causality occur when people develop the belief that there is a causal connection between two variables with no supporting evidence. This cognitive bias has been proposed to underlie many societal problems in…
MisinformationFrom Illusion to Intention: Visual Rationale Learning for Vision-Language Reasoning
Recent advances in vision-language reasoning underscore the importance of thinking with images, where models actively ground their reasoning in visual evidence. Yet, prevailing frameworks treat visual actions as optional…
Do Large Language Models Show Biases in Causal Learning? Insights from Contingency Judgment
Causal learning is the cognitive process of developing the capability of making causal inferences based on available information, often guided by normative principles. This process is prone to errors and biases, such as …
Thinking Isn't an Illusion: Overcoming the Limitations of Reasoning Models via Tool Augmentations
Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) have become a central focus in today's large language model (LLM) research, where models are designed to output a step-by-step thinking process before arriving at a final answer to handle co…
Do Large Language Models Show Biases in Causal Learning?
Causal learning is the cognitive process of developing the capability of making causal inferences based on available information, often guided by normative principles. This process is prone to errors and biases, such as …
2kMisinformation