Skip to content
OpenTrain AIFor AI Companies
← Back to explorer

Dual-Stream Cross-Anchor Correction Grounding Long-Form Captions and the Domain Limits of Object-Level Anchors

LingKai Bu · Aug 13, 2026 · Citations: 0

Automatic Metrics
Open arXiv Find Implementation RSS feed Shortlist (0)

How to use this page

Low trust

Use this as background context only. Do not make protocol decisions from this page alone.

Best use

Background context only

What to verify

Validate the evaluation procedure and quality controls in the full paper before operational use.

Evidence quality

Low

Derived from extracted protocol signals and abstract evidence.

Abstract

Object hallucination in multimodal large language models arises when language priors and corpus co-occurrence bias outweigh the visual evidence, with nothing tying an individual object mention to what the image shows. Most remedies intervene at decoding time without training, yet under a unified protocol their benefit is confined to short captions;supervised fine-tuning (SFT) on a detail- rich corpus lengthens captions, but over forty percent still name absent objects. This paper proposes Dual-Stream Cross-Anchor Correction (DSCC). Unlike work that post-processes decoding, DSCC is the first to inject object-level visual anchors into the language model itself during fine- tuning: a perception stream aligns object-level hidden states at an intermediate layer to frozen text anchors by a bidirectional contrastive objective; a cognition stream lets deeper layers query those anchors by cross-attention at every generation step; and a two-stage curriculum gate couplesthem, making evidence retrieval a structural constraint at each autoregressive step. Under one backbone and one scoring protocol, experiments span long-caption hallucination, object-existence discrimination and cross-domain generalisation, with vanilla SFT on the same corpus and schedule as a length- and density-matched control, so gains are attributed layer by layer. DSCC is the only method reaching the long-caption, low-hallucination region: captions roughly 1.9 times the baseline length at 88.19% precision per object mention, the highest under a density-independent criterion. Ablations expose a synergy: the perception stream alone degrades precision yet reverses sign when stacked on the cognition stream. No universal superiority is claimed: three out-of- domain benchmarks yield a predictable, falsifiable domain-conditionality, the synergy being bound to the anchors' semantic domain and breaking on charts and optical illusions.

Abstract-only analysis — low confidence

All signals on this page are inferred from the abstract only and may be inaccurate. Do not use this page as a primary protocol reference.

  • This paper looks adjacent to evaluation work, but not like a strong protocol reference.
  • The available metadata is too thin to trust this as a primary source.
Human Eval Hub LLM-as-Judge Hub Pairwise Preference Hub

Should You Rely On This Paper?

This paper is adjacent to HFEPX scope and is best used for background context, not as a primary protocol reference.

Best use

Background context only

Use if you need

A secondary eval reference to pair with stronger protocol papers.

Main weakness

This paper looks adjacent to evaluation work, but not like a strong protocol reference.

Trust level

Low

Usefulness score

0/100 • Low

Treat as adjacent context, not a core eval-method reference.

Human Feedback Signal

Not explicit in abstract metadata

Evaluation Signal

Detected

Usefulness for eval research

Adjacent candidate

Extraction confidence 35%

If you are doing eval pipeline work, start here:

Human Eval Hub LLM-as-Judge Hub Pairwise Preference Hub Tool-Use Eval Hub

What We Could Verify

These are the protocol signals we could actually recover from the available paper metadata. Use them to decide whether this paper is worth deeper reading.

Human Feedback Types

missing

None explicit

No explicit feedback protocol extracted.

"Object hallucination in multimodal large language models arises when language priors and corpus co-occurrence bias outweigh the visual evidence, with nothing tying an individual object mention to what the image shows."

Evaluation Modes

partial

Automatic Metrics

Includes extracted eval setup.

"Object hallucination in multimodal large language models arises when language priors and corpus co-occurrence bias outweigh the visual evidence, with nothing tying an individual object mention to what the image shows."

Quality Controls

missing

Not reported

No explicit QC controls found.

"Object hallucination in multimodal large language models arises when language priors and corpus co-occurrence bias outweigh the visual evidence, with nothing tying an individual object mention to what the image shows."

Benchmarks / Datasets

missing

Not extracted

No benchmark anchors detected.

"Object hallucination in multimodal large language models arises when language priors and corpus co-occurrence bias outweigh the visual evidence, with nothing tying an individual object mention to what the image shows."

Reported Metrics

partial

Precision

Useful for evaluation criteria comparison.

"DSCC is the only method reaching the long-caption, low-hallucination region: captions roughly 1.9 times the baseline length at 88.19% precision per object mention, the highest under a density-independent criterion."

Human Feedback Details

  • Uses human feedback: No
  • Feedback types: None
  • Rater population: Not reported
  • Expertise required: General

Evaluation Details

  • Evaluation modes: Automatic Metrics
  • Agentic eval: None
  • Quality controls: Not reported
  • Evidence quality: Low
  • Use this page as: Background context only

Protocol And Measurement Signals

Benchmarks / Datasets

No benchmark or dataset names were extracted from the available abstract.

Reported Metrics

precision

Research Brief

Metadata summary

Object hallucination in multimodal large language models arises when language priors and corpus co-occurrence bias outweigh the visual evidence, with nothing tying an individual object mention to what the image shows.

Based on abstract + metadata only. Check the source paper before making high-confidence protocol decisions.

Key Takeaways

  • Object hallucination in multimodal large language models arises when language priors and corpus co-occurrence bias outweigh the visual evidence, with nothing tying an individual object mention to what the image shows.
  • Most remedies intervene at decoding time without training, yet under a unified protocol their benefit is confined to short captions;supervised fine-tuning (SFT) on a detail- rich corpus lengthens captions, but over forty percent still name absent objects.
  • This paper proposes Dual-Stream Cross-Anchor Correction (DSCC).

Researcher Actions

  • Compare this paper against nearby papers in the same arXiv category before using it for protocol decisions.
  • Check the full text for explicit evaluation design choices (raters, protocol, and metrics).
  • Use related-paper links to find stronger protocol-specific references.

Caveats

  • Generated from abstract + metadata only; no PDF parsing.
  • Signals below are heuristic and may miss details reported outside the abstract.

Recommended Queries

Research Summary

Contribution Summary

  • DSCC is the only method reaching the long-caption, low-hallucination region: captions roughly 1.9 times the baseline length at 88.19% precision per object mention, the highest under a density-independent criterion.
  • No universal superiority is claimed: three out-of- domain benchmarks yield a predictable, falsifiable domain-conditionality, the synergy being bound to the anchors' semantic domain and breaking on charts and optical illusions.

Why It Matters For Eval

  • No universal superiority is claimed: three out-of- domain benchmarks yield a predictable, falsifiable domain-conditionality, the synergy being bound to the anchors' semantic domain and breaking on charts and optical illusions.

Researcher Checklist

  • Gap: Human feedback protocol is explicit

    No explicit human feedback protocol detected.

  • Pass: Evaluation mode is explicit

    Detected: Automatic Metrics

  • Gap: Quality control reporting appears

    No calibration/adjudication/IAA control explicitly detected.

  • Gap: Benchmark or dataset anchors are present

    No benchmark/dataset anchor extracted from abstract.

  • Pass: Metric reporting is present

    Detected: precision

Related Papers

Papers are ranked by protocol overlap, extraction signal alignment, and semantic proximity.