Sichao Li, Sai Ma, Xiyang Hu, Chudi Zhong, Tongliang Liu
A common assumption in chain-of-thought (CoT) oversight is that a visible reasoning trace makes model behavior easier to monitor. We argue that this assumption can conflate distinct properties along a chain linking a model's internal computation, reasoning artifacts, outputs, and monitor judgments. We identify four properties along this chain: reasoning visibility (whether a trace is accessible), mechanistic faithfulness (whether a trace reflects internal computation), mechanistic localizability (whether a compact causal mechanism can be isolated), and behavioral monitorability (whether a monitor can detect the target behavior). Two complementary case studies across three open-weight reasoning models show why these distinctions matter. In the security vulnerability reasoning study, probes and activation ablations provide evidence of internal representation and causal influence, but a monitor with access to the reference answer does not outperform the majority-class baseline in a held-out test. In authority-hint factual reasoning study, a monitor correctly distinguishes changed from unchanged answers, but seven mechanistic analyses do not isolate a compact causal mechanism. These results show that evidence for one claim does not establish the others. We therefore propose an evidential-chain reporting standard. Each claim carries a licensing statement that specifies its target property, access tier, and artifact, and labels each required link as supported, unsupported, or assumed. These assessments determine whether the conclusion is licensed, conditionally licensed, or not licensed.
Venna, Venkata Kesav, Gunda, Sai Madhusudan, Jinka, Jyothi Swaroopa, Rachakonda, Hrithik Sagar, Srinivasan, Anirudh, Sarvadevabhatla, Ravi Kiran
**Document QA** requires not only accurate answers but also identifying where each answer is grounded on the page. Most models treat the task as text-only generation, while existing answer grounding methods generate coarse bounding boxes that fail to capture curved text. We introduce **M3Grounder, a hybrid vision-language and segmentation architecture that formulates document grounding as pixel-level segmentation. It produces fine-grained evidence masks** refined by a bleed-suppression loss to prevent spillover. M3Grounder autoregressively generates answer text interleaved with [GROUND] tokens that link individual answer spans to their corresponding evidence regions. Also, **M3Grounder grounds evidence hierarchically across phrase, line, and block levels** using an enclosure loss that enforces spatial containment. We release **GroundingDocQA dataset (200K documents, 2M multi-span and multi-granular QA pairs with pixel-level grounding masks)**, built through a data engine that handles complex layouts, curved-text, and graphics-rich documents. We also release **GroundingDocQA-Bench, a diverse and challenging human-verified benchmark**. M3Grounder sets **a new state of the art in grounded DocVQA, advancing from coarse boxes to hierarchical, fine-grained and contextually grounded evidence.**
尚无 AI 解读，展示原文摘要
cs.CV
Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition · 2026 · 正式发表