跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail
← 研踪 PaperTrail

arXiv:2611.10297 · v1

Uncertainty, Not Concealment: A Mechanistic Reappraisal of Sycophancy in Vision-Language Models

首次提交 2026-11-07 06:46
版本更新 2026-11-07 06:46
雷达观测 2026-11-10 10:11
arXiv ↗PDF ↗

摘要

Vision-language models (VLMs) in medical retrieval-augmented generation must be able to say when a retrieved report contradicts the X-ray, so understanding whether they can detect such conflicts is important for safe deployment. The sycophancy mask hypothesis holds that these models internally detect conflicts but refuse to report them, concealing a detected contradiction. We introduce a three-part diagnostic that separates concealment from uncertainty: representation probing, activation steering, and two-way forced choice. Across four instruction-tuned VLMs on chest X-rays, we confirm behavioral suppression of contradiction and find that a linear probe separates matched from mismatched inputs, beyond what a simple CLIP model achieves. Steering the learned conflict direction never elicits contradiction, and forcing a binary choice does not recover one; instead, cross-modal attention to the image drops on mismatched pairs. We conclude that these models fail to contradict because the mismatch registers as hedged, gated uncertainty rather than concealed knowledge, calling for re-grounding and uncertainty surfacing. Code is available at https://github.com/mohamed-eldagla/Uncertainty-Not-Concealment/.

作者备注:Accepted to the NeurIPS 2026 Med-Reasoner Workshop

AI 论文解读

基于摘要 · 非全文审阅

此版本尚未生成 AI 解读。解读由后台任务生成并按论文版本保存,登录后共享已有结果。

版本差异

目前只观测到一个版本,无法比较变化。之后收录新版本时,会在这里对照标题、作者、分类和摘要。

观测到的版本

相邻记录可能跳过中间版本;首次发现 v2 及以上也会标为版本更新。

v1 · 2026-11-07 06:46 · 最新观测版本

Uncertainty, Not Concealment: A Mechanistic Reappraisal of Sycophancy in Vision-Language Models

Vision-language models (VLMs) in medical retrieval-augmented generation must be able to say when a retrieved report contradicts the X-ray, so understanding whether they can detect such conflicts is important for safe deployment. The sycophancy mask hypothesis holds that these models internally detect conflicts but refuse to report them, concealing a detected contradiction. We introduce a three-part diagnostic that separates concealment from uncertainty: representation probing, activation steering, and two-way forced choice. Across four instruction-tuned VLMs on chest X-rays, we confirm behavioral suppression of contradiction and find that a linear probe separates matched from mismatched inputs, beyond what a simple CLIP model achieves. Steering the learned conflict direction never elicits contradiction, and forcing a binary choice does not recover one; instead, cross-modal attention to the image drops on mismatched pairs. We conclude that these models fail to contradict because the mismatch registers as hedged, gated uncertainty rather than concealed knowledge, calling for re-grounding and uncertainty surfacing. Code is available at https://github.com/mohamed-eldagla/Uncertainty-Not-Concealment/.

查看此版本解读 →查看此版本原文 ↗