Skip to content
← Back to explorer

Scale Can't Overcome Pragmatics: The Impact of Reporting Bias on Vision-Language Reasoning

Amita Kamath, Jack Hessel, Khyathi Chandu, Jena D. Hwang, Kai-Wei Chang, Ranjay Krishna · Feb 26, 2026 · Citations: 0

Abstract

The lack of reasoning capabilities in Vision-Language Models (VLMs) has remained at the forefront of research discourse. We posit that this behavior stems from a reporting bias in their training data. That is, how people communicate about visual content by default omits tacit information needed to supervise some types of reasoning; e.g., "at the game today!" is a more likely caption than "a photo of 37 people standing behind a field". We investigate the data underlying the popular VLMs OpenCLIP, LLaVA-1.5 and Molmo through the lens of theories from pragmatics, and find that reporting bias results in insufficient representation of four reasoning skills (spatial, temporal, negation, and counting), despite the corpora being of web-scale, and/or synthetically generated. With a set of curated benchmarks, we demonstrate that: (i) VLMs perform poorly on the aforementioned types of reasoning suppressed in the training data by reporting bias; (ii) contrary to popular belief, scaling data size, model size, and to multiple languages does not result in emergence of these skills by default; but, promisingly, (iii) incorporating annotations specifically collected to obtain tacit information is effective. Our findings highlight the need for more intentional training data curation methods, rather than counting on scale for emergence of reasoning capabilities.

Human Data Lens

  • Uses human feedback: No
  • Feedback types: None
  • Rater population: Unknown
  • Unit of annotation: Unknown
  • Expertise required: Multilingual

Evaluation Lens

  • Evaluation modes: Automatic Metrics
  • Agentic eval: None
  • Quality controls: Not reported
  • Confidence: 0.30
  • Flags: low_signal, possible_false_positive

Research Summary

Contribution Summary

  • The lack of reasoning capabilities in Vision-Language Models (VLMs) has remained at the forefront of research discourse.
  • We posit that this behavior stems from a reporting bias in their training data.
  • That is, how people communicate about visual content by default omits tacit information needed to supervise some types of reasoning; e.g., "at the game today!" is a more likely caption than "a photo of 37 people standing behind a field".

Why It Matters For Eval

  • With a set of curated benchmarks, we demonstrate that: (i) VLMs perform poorly on the aforementioned types of reasoning suppressed in the training data by reporting bias; (ii) contrary to popular belief, scaling data size, model size, and t

Related Papers