Miguel P. Eckstein

Shravan Murlidaran, Miguel P. Eckstein

Vision language models (VLMs) have made remarkable progress in visual reasoning during the last decade. Most evaluations have used simple scenes (MS-COCO) that do not showcase complex human interactions or behaviors, only a handful of non-curated human descriptions as a benchmark, and have not focused on understanding the model's error types. Here, we introduce the Complex Social Behavior (CSB) dataset, containing 100 images depicting complex social interactions/behaviors. We analyze the progression of scene descriptions over a decade (2017-2025) of VLMs (four pre-Multimodal Large Language Models, MLLMs, and five MLLMs). We evaluate the accuracy of the models and 20 human descriptions relative to a gold standard on the CSB dataset and on a sample from MS-COCO. We analyzed five visual-cognitive error types: object detection, recognition, hallucination, scene understanding, and spatial dependence. The CSB dataset showed a more pronounced improvement than MS-COCO in scene description accuracy, with pre-MLLMs achieving much lower accuracy than the bottom-ranked human descriptions and MLLMs attaining accuracies similar to the top-ranked human descriptions. We show that MLLMs have eliminated the gap in scene description accuracy between simpler MS-COCO scenes and scenes depicting complex behaviors (CSB). MLLMs have almost eliminated all error types in our tested datasets, except for occasionally relying on different image regions for scene descriptions than humans do (spatial dependence error). We also show that detection, recognition, and hallucination errors have the highest impact on scene description accuracy. Together, our findings provide a more thorough evaluation of how visual language models have advanced over the last decade.

Ziqi Wen, Parsa Madinei, Miguel P. Eckstein

Evaluating whether large vision-language models (VLMs) align with human perception for high-level semantic scene comprehension remains a challenge. Traditional white-box interpretability methods are inapplicable to closed-source architectures and passive metrics fail to isolate causal features. We introduce Counterfactual Semantic Saliency (CSS). This black-box, model-agnostic framework quantifies the importance of objects by measuring the semantic shift induced by their causal ablation from a scene. To evaluate AI-human semantic alignment, we tested prominent VLMs against a human psychophysics baseline comprising 16,289 valid responses across 307 complex natural scenes and 1,306 high-fidelity counterfactual variants. Our analysis reveals a pervasive scene comprehension gap: models exhibit an overreliance (relative to humans) on large objects (size bias), objects at the center of the image (center bias), and high saliency objects. In contrast, models rely less on people in the scenes than our human participants to describe the images. A model's size bias is a primary driver explaining variations in model-human semantic divergence. Code and data will be available at https://github.com/starsky77/Counterfactual-Semantic-Saliency.

Shravan Murlidaran, Ziqi Wen, Sana Shehabi et al.

When humans view scenes without a specific task (free-viewing), they initially direct their eye movements toward the scene center and then fixate on people, text, objects being gazed at or grasped, and semantically meaningful regions. What these signature fixation patterns reflect and whether they optimize an underlying perceptual task remain unknown. We show that a computational agent with simulated foveation, trained to optimize scene comprehension, exhibits emergent human fixation signature patterns. In contrast, versions of the agent trained to search or classify scenes, or equipped with peripheral vision that was better or worse than human vision, predicted human fixation patterns less accurately. Thus, human free-viewing fixation patterns may emerge as a functional byproduct of optimizing scene comprehension under the biological constraints of foveated vision.