SearcharxivSearch

arXiv subjects

Heqing Du

Publications and source records attributed to Heqing Du.

6 recordsLinked to original sources

Teaching Vision-Language Models to Use the Scale They Are Given: Label-Free Equivariance Training for Metric Physical Reasoning

Metric questions about video require vision-language models to use supplied real-world references to convert visual measurements into physical units. Yet we find that current models use this scale information only partially. When every world-space quantity in a prompt is rescaled by a common factor, the video remains equally valid and the correct answer changes by exactly that factor, but model predictions move only part of the way and accuracy remains concentrated near the familiar scale of the depicted objects. Across eight vision-language models, this under-response persists over four orders of magnitude. The same models recover the correct closed-form scaling laws when the identical physics is asked in a scale-free form, indicating that the main deficit lies in metric grounding rather than physical mechanism knowledge. We use this exact scaling relation as supervision without requiring metric annotations. Under a common rescaling of the supplied world-space quantities, the correct metric answer must change by the same factor. EquiSD exploits this constraint by projecting a model's own prediction onto the scale-equivariant family and fine-tuning the model on the resulting targets. It requires no ground-truth answers and only one model query per training video. On held-out simulated videos, EquiSD increases a 3B model's median response slope from 0.66 to 0.94 and improves mean relative accuracy by 9.2 points across scales. The learned relation generalizes to unseen world scales and transfers without adaptation to real QuantiPhy videos, where accuracy increases by 6.4 points. These results show that an exact physical symmetry can provide label-free supervision for improving metric grounding in vision-language models.

cs.CV

Beyond Multimodal Alignment: Certifying Physical Language through Response Substitution and Ordered Execution

World models increasingly treat compact multimodal representations as interfaces between perception and physical interaction, yet existing probes do not establish whether different sensors carry the same executable meaning or whether that meaning survives a new action composition. We introduce an operational capability hierarchy and the Disjoint-Bridge Operator-Substitution Certificate (DBOSC), which asks whether independently trained modality compilers enter a frozen response chart interchangeably on evidence outside their training panels. On Cluster Haptic, audio and acceleration representations of the same unseen surface are 4.5x closer in response space than wrong-surface pairings, with the gap holding for all 19 held-out surfaces; unsealing withheld responses confirms that every branch predicts the physics better than the population chart. We then test ordered execution in a controlled elastoplastic system with complementary modality blind spots. At the pre-registered budget, the prerequisite refuses the stack because the frozen executor cannot advance even an exact chart coordinate through a held-out program. At a converged budget, the same rank-three chart executes those programs (oracle NMSE 0.18), fusion improves on both modalities, and 14 of 16 registered checks pass; the two failures arise because a diagonal restriction of the fused information matrix performs as well as the full one. Clearing the gate is a property of the executor, not the chart: an executor emitting whole programs instead of shared per-step dynamics is 38x worse than an entity-blind predictor on the same chart. A matching non-identifiability result explains why compression and fusion alone cannot determine an unseen composition law. These results separate attribute access, response substitution, fusion closure, and ordered execution into distinct, separately testable achievements.

cs.LG

What Can Latent World Models Know? Physical Parameter Identifiability in Multimodal Predictive Representations

A central premise of latent world models is that predicting the future forces a representation to internalize the physics of its environment. Which physical quantities does a trained latent actually contain, and what decides this? We answer with controlled interventions in POKEWORLD, an interactive environment whose visually identical objects hide mass, drag, and contact stiffness. A certificate-gated protocol first certifies each parameter as recoverable from raw observations, then measures whether it enters the latent, so a null result can be attributed to the objective rather than to the environment. The resulting identifiability map has two organizing mechanisms and one frontier. Inputs limit what can be known, while prediction targets decide what is retained. Stiffness enters the latent only when touch is forecast ($R^2=0.50$, compared with $-0.02$ when the same signal is merely fused into the input), and under single-step prediction a vision-only latent discards even perfectly visible object state. Drag marks the frontier. It carries a recoverability certificate of 0.89 yet plateaus near 0.13 under every deterministic prediction objective we test, while a supervised head on the same trunk reaches 0.45. Parameters whose readout is slow and ratio-type under the sensed coordinates fall outside what these objectives acquire. On RH20T, an input-target factorial across scaling curves reproduces both mechanisms across two robots and 4,258 episodes. Every arm missing information or prediction pressure stays flat over a fivefold data range, and only the full multimodal objective forecasts force beyond a persistence baseline, with held-out gains that grow with scale. Objective structure determines which physical parameters a latent acquires, and additional data improves only the parameters it already acquires.

cs.LG

How Many Bits Can an Adapter Write? Measuring the Capacity and Memorization of Parameter-Efficient Fine-Tuning

A LoRA adapter is a few megabytes that almost everyone treats as a skill rather than a record of the data behind it. We put that assumption on a scale. Extending compression-based memorization analysis to the frozen-base setting, we measure directly, in bits, how much a low-rank adapter writes into a model it never changes. The answer is both smaller than full fine-tuning and less lawful than parameter counting would predict. Adapters store a couple of bits per trainable parameter, well short of a full model's budget, but that figure turns less on how many parameters an adapter carries than on where they sit. Move the same parameter budget from attention into the MLP and it holds nearly twice as much; strip the frozen base of its structure and the capacity all but disappears. Applied to realistic fine-tunes of Qwen2.5, the same instrument shows privacy leakage rising with the bits an adapter writes rather than the parameters it nominally has, and it draws a clean line between supervised and reinforcement learning: the secrets that supervised fine-tuning copies down verbatim, an adapter trained on verifiable rewards never records. Measuring what fine-tuning writes, rather than attacking it after the fact, turns a piece of folklore into a quantity one can design against.

cs.LG

When Does Visual Token Pruning Improve Calibration? The Role of Evidence Coverage in MLLMs

Visual token pruning is widely used to reduce the inference cost of multimodal large language models (MLLMs), but it is usually evaluated only by accuracy. We study how pruning affects calibration, defined as the agreement between confidence and correctness, and show that the selection rule matters more than the token budget alone. On POPE with LLaVA-1.5, coverage-based pruning from 576 to 128 tokens reduces expected calibration error from 0.041 to 0.016 without a statistically significant accuracy loss. In contrast, attention-based selection preserves confidence while accuracy deteriorates, becoming less calibrated than random pruning at aggressive budgets. Across pruning conditions, kept-set coverage is strongly associated with accuracy (Spearman $\rho=+0.89$) but not with mean confidence ($\rho=-0.03$), producing a strong inverse relation with overconfidence ($\rho=-0.92$); controlled kept-set interventions support this evidence-coverage account. Two boundaries limit it: query-conditioned FastV is more overconfident than its coverage predicts, and on language-prior-dominated ScienceQA, coverage ceases to order calibration. The selector ordering otherwise generalizes to GQA and LLaVA-NeXT, and coverage beats random on Qwen2-VL, although the calibration gain over the unpruned model is task- and model-dependent. We also identify an evaluation pitfall in FastV: zeroing rather than removing pruned tokens can reduce accuracy to chance. Visual token pruning therefore changes confidence quality as well as efficiency, and calibration should be evaluated alongside accuracy when comparing pruning methods.

cs.CV

CREG: Compass Relational Evidence Graph for Characterizing Directional Structure in VLM Spatial-Reasoning Attribution

Standard attribution heatmaps show where a vision-language model (VLM) focuses, but they do not reveal whether the recovered evidence is organized by the queried spatial relation or merely reflects image layout. To address this problem, we introduce CREG (Compass Relational Evidence Graph), a training-free diagnostic framework that converts token-level attribution into a reference-centered compass distribution and measures its directional alignment. CREG provides a shared directional readout across attribution methods and makes comparison with geometric controls explicit. Across three spatial-relation benchmarks, box-only geometry achieves Direction Alignment Error 28.4 to 34.4 degrees lower than the best current model-based attribution method on each dataset, leaving a substantial gap between attribution structure and simple target localization. To examine this gap, we apply a diagnostic battery including target intervention, reference-center randomization, and variance partition. Taken together, the results suggest that the directional structure recoverable from current attribution methods is limited and often mixed with image layout. We further find that higher task accuracy does not reliably coincide with better directional attribution: small-scale LoRA training and newer model generations can improve task accuracy while leaving Direction Alignment Error unchanged or worse. These findings characterize what current attribution methods reveal rather than the model's internal spatial representation. CREG provides a controlled protocol for testing whether improvements in spatial reasoning are accompanied by more directionally organized evidence.

cs.CV