Skip to content
AI News HubLIVE
Source content · Analysis pending2 min read

Composition, Not Conversation: VLMs Lose the Scene, Not the Thread

Summary

arXiv:2609.38368v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Vision-language models (VLMs) increasingly reason over visual evidence that is cropped, segmented, retrieved, or revealed over time. Yet most VQA benchmarks present the complete image and question at once. We ask what models lose when the same information is fragmented. We introduce Layered-VQA, with 93 scenes and 300 questions. Each image is decomposed into ordered RGBA layers that exactly recompose the original scene, and each question is annotated with supporting, minimal-sufficient, and distractor layers. We evaluate eleven open-weight VLMs from 3B to 32B parameters and two proprietary models with a scale of 187,200 conversations, graded by 1.74M open-model cross-judgments. We find three consistent failures. Loss in Composition: fragment…

SourcearXiv Computer VisionAuthor: L. D. M. S. Sai Teja, Ufaq Khan, N. Siva Gopala Krishna, Satyajit Tourani, Ashshak Sharifdeen, Fida Mohammad Thoker, Bernard Ghanem, Muhammad Haris Khan
Composition, Not Conversation: VLMs Lose the Scene, Not the Thread
Report an error

The correction channel is not available yet. You can copy the article reference below for later.

Correction instructions
Read article

[Submitted on 29 Sep 2026]

Title:Composition, Not Conversation: VLMs Lose the Scene, Not the Thread

View a PDF of the paper titled Composition, Not Conversation: VLMs Lose the Scene, Not the Thread, by L. D. M. S. Sai Teja and 7 other authors

View PDF HTML (experimental)

Abstract:Vision-language models (VLMs) increasingly reason over visual evidence that is cropped, segmented, retrieved, or revealed over time. Yet most VQA benchmarks present the complete image and question at once. We ask what models lose when the same information is fragmented. We introduce Layered-VQA, with 93 scenes and 300 questions. Each image is decomposed into ordered RGBA layers that exactly recompose the original scene, and each question is annotated with supporting, minimal-sufficient, and distractor layers. We evaluate eleven open-weight VLMs from 3B to 32B parameters and two proprietary models with a scale of 187,200 conversations, graded by 1.74M open-model cross-judgments. We find three consistent failures. Loss in Composition: fragmenting the question has a small effect, but fragmenting the scene substantially reduces accuracy; recomposing the same layers largely restores performance. Oracle Inversion: even oracle-selected sufficient evidence can perform worse than the complete scene. Loss in Grounding: as more evidence is required, grounding degrades much faster than answer accuracy. Together, these results show that having the right visual evidence is not enough. How that evidence is composed and presented determines whether models can use and ground it. The right evidence is not enough: VLMs need the scene it came from.

Comments: 33 pages, 10 figures, 11 tables. Code: this https URL . Dataset: this https URL

Subjects:

Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (cs.CV)

Cite as: arXiv:2609.38368 [cs.CV]

(or arXiv:2609.38368v1 [cs.CV] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.38368

arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

Submission history

From: Lekkala Sai Teja [view email] [v1] Tue, 29 Sep 2026 18:29:43 UTC (9,775 KB)

Full-text links:

Access Paper:

View a PDF of the paper titled Composition, Not Conversation: VLMs Lose the Scene, Not the Thread, by L. D. M. S. Sai Teja and 7 other authors

View PDF

HTML (experimental)

TeX Source

view license

Current browse context:

cs.CV

new | recent | 2026-09

Change to browse by:

cs

References & Citations

NASA ADS

Google Scholar

Semantic Scholar

Loading...

Data provided by:

Bibliographic Tools

Bibliographic and Citation Tools

Bibliographic Explorer Toggle

Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?)

Connected Papers Toggle

Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?)

Litmaps Toggle

Litmaps (What is Litmaps?)

scite.ai Toggle

scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?)

Code, Data, Media

Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article

alphaXiv Toggle

alphaXiv (What is alphaXiv?)

Links to Code Toggle

CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers (What is CatalyzeX?)

DagsHub Toggle

DagsHub (What is DagsHub?)

GotitPub Toggle

Gotit.pub (What is GotitPub?)

Huggingface Toggle

Hugging Face (What is Huggingface?)

ScienceCast Toggle

ScienceCast (What is ScienceCast?)

Demos

Demos

Replicate Toggle

Replicate (What is Replicate?)

Spaces Toggle

Hugging Face Spaces (What is Spaces?)

Spaces Toggle

TXYZ.AI (What is TXYZ.AI?)

Related Papers

Recommenders and Search Tools

Link to Influence Flower

Influence Flower (What are Influence Flowers?)

Core recommender toggle

CORE Recommender (What is CORE?)

Author

Venue

Institution

Topic

About arXivLabs

arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Which authors of this paper are endorsers? | Disable MathJax (What is MathJax?)

Key points and analysis

Article intelligence

EngineersAdvanced

Key points

  • AI generation is temporarily unavailable; this entry was preserved with deterministic fallback metadata.
  • arXiv:2609.38368v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Vision-language models (VLMs) increasingly reason over visual evidence that is cropped, segmented, retrieved, or revealed over time…

Highlights and analysis are generated automatically and may contain errors. Check the original source.