benchmarks evals
Coordinates Help When Words Cannot Point
Grounded reasoning improves counting, but broad spatial gains appear mainly when the reference is difficult to describe in language.
Summary
Grounded reasoning improves counting, but broad spatial gains appear mainly when the reference is difficult to describe in language.
A detailed ablation of grounded visual reasoning found that emitting text coordinates improved counting but produced no significant advantage over nongrounded baselines across a wider set of spatial-reasoning and perception benchmarks. Synthetic tasks isolated the useful case: references that are visually precise but hard to name. The authors therefore introduce BrickVision, which requires such undescribable references, and a trace analysis that measures whether a model actually uses its proposed grounding. The result narrows the claim for coordinate-based reasoning instead of treating it as a universal visual upgrade.
Why it matters
Grounded reasoning improves counting, but broad spatial gains appear mainly when the reference is difficult to describe in language.
Limits and context
No additional limitation was separately recorded.
Key claims
Grounded reasoning improves counting, but broad spatial gains appear mainly when the reference is difficult to describe in language.
Evidence: source-2026-11-08-005
Sources
- arXiv preprint 2611.08485, original v1arXiv · primary research
Corrections
No corrections have been recorded for this story.