SQuINTing at VQA Models: Introspecting VQA Models With Sub-Questions
Ramprasaath R. Selvaraju, Purva Tendulkar, Devi Parikh, Eric Horvitz, Marco Túlio Ribeiro, Besmira Nushi, Ece Kamar
Abstract
Existing VQA datasets contain questions with varying levels of complexity. While the majority of questions in these datasets require perception for recognizing existence, properties, and spatial relationships of entities, a significant portion of questions pose challenges that correspond to reasoning tasks - tasks that can only be answered through a synthesis of perception and knowledge about the world, logic and / or reasoning. Analyzing performance across this distinction allows us to notice when existing VQA models have consistency issues - they answer the reasoning questions correctly but fail on associated low-level perception questions. For example, in Figure 1, models answer the complex reasoning question “Is the banana ripe enough to eat?” correctly, but fail on the associated perception question “Are the bananas mostly green or yellow?” indicating that the model likely answered the reasoning question correctly but for the wrong reason. We quantify the extent to which this phenomenon occurs by creating a new Reasoning split of the VQA dataset and collecting VQAintrospect, a new dataset1 which currently consists of 200K new perception questions which serve as sub questions corresponding to the set of perceptual tasks needed to effectively answer the complex reasoning questions in the Reasoning split. Our evaluation shows that state-of-the-art VQA models have comparable performance in answering perception and reasoning questions, but suffer from consistency problems. To address this shortcoming, we propose an approach called Sub-Question Importance-aware Network Tuning (SQuINT), which encourages the model to attend to the same parts of the image when answering the reasoning question and the perception sub question. We show that SQuINT improves model consistency by 7%, also marginally improving performance on the Reasoning questions in VQA, while also displaying better attention maps.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Cited by top-tier papers17
- Contrast and Classify: Training Robust VQA ModelsYash Kant, Abhinav Moudgil, Dhruv Batra, Devi Parikh et al.ICCV 2021 · 30 citations
- Maintaining Reasoning Consistency in Compositional Visual Question AnsweringChenchen Jing, Yunde Jia, Yuwei Wu, Xinyu Liu et al.CVPR 2022 · 27 citations
- Exploring Question Decomposition for Zero-Shot VQAZaid Khan, Vijay Kumar B. G, Samuel Schulter, Manmohan Chandraker et al.NeurIPS 2023 · 26 citations
- Unleashing the Power of Compiler Intermediate Representation to Enhance Neural Program EmbeddingsZongjie Li, Pingchuan Ma, Huaijin Wang, Shuai Wang et al.ICSE 2022 · 25 citations
- Discovering the Unknown Knowns: Turning Implicit Knowledge in the Dataset into Explicit Training Examples for Visual Question AnsweringJihyung Kil, Cheng Zhang, Dong Xuan, Wei-Lun ChaoEMNLP 2021 · 17 citations
Builds on1
Related papers
- Neuro-Symbolic Visual Reasoning: Disentangling "Visual" from "Reasoning"Saeed Amizadeh, Hamid Palangi, Alex Polozov, Yichen Huang et al.ICML 2020 · 74 citations
- V-PROM: A Benchmark for Visual Reasoning Using Visual Progressive MatricesDamien Teney, Peng Wang, Jiewei Cao, Lingqiao Liu et al.AAAI 2020 · 37 citations
- Logical Implications for Visual Question Answering ConsistencySergio Tascon-Morales, Pablo Márquez-Neila, Raphael SznitmanCVPR 2023
- VisRes Bench: On Evaluating the Visual Reasoning Capabilities of VLMsBrigitta Malagurski Törtei, Yasser Dahou, Ngoc Dung Huynh, Wamiq Reyaz Para et al.CVPR 2026 · 3 citations
- ReasonVQA: A Multi-Hop Reasoning Benchmark with Structural Knowledge for Visual Question AnsweringDuong T. Tran, Trung-Kien Tran, Manfred Hauswirth, Danh Le PhuocICCV 2025 · 2 citations
