Exploring Response Uncertainty in MLLMs: An Empirical Evaluation under Misleading Scenarios

Ensuring that Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) maintain consistency in their responses is essential for developing trustworthy multimodal intelligence. However, existing benchmarks include many samples where all MLLMs \textit{exhibit high response uncertainty when encountering misleading information}, requiring even 5-15 response attempts per sample to effectively assess uncertainty. Therefore, we propose a two-stage pipeline: first, we collect MLLMs' responses without misleading information, and then gather misleading ones via specific misleading instructions. By calculating the misleading rate, and capturing both correct-to-incorrect and incorrect-to-correct shifts between the two sets of responses, we can effectively metric the model's response uncertainty. Eventually, we establish a \textbf{\underline{M}}ultimodal \textbf{\underline{U}}ncertainty \textbf{\underline{B}}enchmark (\textbf{MUB}) that employs both explicit and implicit misleading instructions to comprehensively assess the vulnerability of MLLMs across diverse domains. Our experiments reveal that all open-source and close-source MLLMs are highly susceptible to misleading instructions, with an average misleading rate exceeding 86\%. To enhance the robustness of MLLMs, we further fine-tune all open-source MLLMs by incorporating explicit and implicit misleading data, which demonstrates a significant reduction in misleading rates. Our code is available at: \href{https://github.com/Yunkai696/MUB}{https://github.com/Yunkai696/MUB}

Reasoning Factual Knowledge in Structured Data with Large Language Models

Large language models (LLMs) have made remarkable progress in various natural language processing tasks as a benefit of their capability to comprehend and reason with factual knowledge. However, a significant amount of factual knowledge is stored in structured data, which possesses unique characteristics that differ from the unstructured texts used for pretraining. This difference can introduce imperceptible inference parameter deviations, posing challenges for LLMs in effectively utilizing and reasoning with structured data to accurately infer factual knowledge. To this end, we propose a benchmark named StructFact, to evaluate the structural reasoning capabilities of LLMs in inferring factual knowledge. StructFact comprises 8,340 factual questions encompassing various tasks, domains, timelines, and regions. This benchmark allows us to investigate the capability of LLMs across five factual tasks derived from the unique characteristics of structural facts. Extensive experiments on a set of LLMs with different training strategies reveal the limitations of current LLMs in inferring factual knowledge from structured data. We present this benchmark as a compass to navigate the strengths and weaknesses of LLMs in reasoning with structured data for knowledge-sensitive tasks, and to encourage advancements in related real-world applications. Please find our code at https://github.com/EganGu/StructFact.