When to Rethink: Learning Multi-Perspective Self-Verification for Vision-Language Models
Abstract
Vision-language models (VLMs) have achieved strong performance in multimodal reasoning, yet they remain prone to generating plausible but incorrect answers. Self-verification offers a practical way to improve answer reliability without relying on external judges, but existing methods typically depend on a single verification criterion or fixed prompt, resulting in incomplete and unstable reliability estimates. We first systematically analyze how verifier capability and prompt design affect verification performance. Our findings show that stronger verifiers provide more reliable judgments, while verification performance is highly sensitive to prompt choice, with no single prompt consistently dominating across tasks. Guided by these findings, we propose MOTIVE, a Multi-View Self-VerificatiOn wiTh RelIability-Guided SelectiVE Rethinking framework for reliable multimodal reasoning. MOTIVE evaluates each candidate answer from complementary verification perspectives and learns a correctness-aligned reliability score through correctness-grounded multi-view verification learning. During inference, this score governs an accept-or-rethink decision, allowing reliable answers to be returned directly while uncertain ones trigger history-guided rethinking. Extensive experiments across diverse multimodal benchmarks and VLM backbones demonstrate that MOTIVE consistently outperforms strong self-verification and self-correction baselines. Further results show that reliable verification improves accept-or-rethink decisions and reduces unnecessary reasoning turns, enabling more reliable and efficient self-verification without an external judge.
Community
๐ง MOTIVE: When to Rethink
Learning Multi-Perspective Self-Verification for Vision-Language Models
We introduce MOTIVE, a framework that helps vision-language models decide when to trust an answer and when to rethink, using complementary verification perspectives and a learned reliability score.
๐ Read the paper ยท ๐ป GitHub
๐ Method overview
MOTIVE follows an Answer โ Verify โ Accept or Rethink process:
- Answer: Generate a candidate answer from the image and question.
- Verify: Evaluate the answer using five complementary verification perspectives.
- Decide: Accept reliable answers, or rethink using verification feedback and interaction history.
Answering and verification use the same backbone VLM, without an external judge during inference.
๐ Main results
Evaluation covers five benchmarks and three VLM backbones. Average accuracy across the five benchmarks improves as follows:
| Backbone | Baseline | MOTIVE | Gain |
|---|---|---|---|
| Qwen2.5-VL-3B | 55.11% | 63.13% | +8.02 pp |
| Qwen2.5-VL-7B | 60.49% | 68.63% | +8.14 pp |
pp = percentage points.
MOTIVE also reduces the average number of answer-generation turns compared with conventional self-verification.
๐ก What motivates this approach?
Verifier capability matters. Stronger external judges improve final-answer accuracy in our preliminary analysis, motivating the development of stronger self-verification.
Prompt choice matters. No single verification prompt consistently performs best across tasks. This motivates combining complementary verification perspectives.
Get this paper in your agent:
hf papers read 2610.07018 Don't have the latest CLI?
curl -LsSf https://hf.co/cli/install.sh | bash Models citing this paper 0
No model linking this paper
Datasets citing this paper 0
No dataset linking this paper
Spaces citing this paper 0
No Space linking this paper
Collections including this paper 0
No Collection including this paper


