Recent attempts to leverage large language models (LLMs) for reasoning and pre-trained knowledge in multi-modal reasoning focus on two main approaches: aligning image features with linguistic space, and converting images into textual cues to exploit the implicit reasoning capabilities of LLMs. Although they integrate visual information into the reasoning pipeline, they often treat visual perception and language reasoning as separate processes, limiting the potential for fully unified multi-modal reasoning. In this paper, we propose a novel method, Visual–Linguistic Abductive Reasoning (ViLA), inspired by human abductive reasoning processes. ViLA hypothesizes a plausible answer, generates the corresponding visual and textual premises, and employs fuzzy scoring to select the most coherent combination, thus deriving the final inference. This process integrates visual and linguistic modalities into interpretable abductive reasoning chains, enabling unified multi-modal reasoning. Without fine-tuning LLMs or retrieving external knowledge, ViLA improves performance by 2.31% on AOKVQA, 1.7% on OKVQA, and 1.7% on GQA over previous state-of-the-art models, while also improving interpretability and stability.

Consistent reasoning about 3D spatial relations across changing viewpoints is fundamental for Embodied AI agents operating in dynamic environments. While Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs) have advanced multimodal perception, their ability to maintain spatial consistency across diverse perspectives remains underexplored. Existing benchmarks primarily assess spatial capabilities from a static, single-view, and egocentric perspective, failing to capture the dynamic nature of real-world spatial cognition.To address this gap, we introduce SCOPE (Spatial COnsistency across PErspectives and Viewpoints), a comprehensive benchmark designed to rigorously diagnose spatial reasoning capabilities. Grounded in human cognitive theories of dual spatial representations, SCOPE discretizes the 360∘ field into multiview scenarios to systematically evaluate both allocentric and egocentric reasoning capabilities. Our dataset comprises 20.1K spatial VQA pairs derived from high-quality 3D environments. Through an extensive evaluation of 26 state-of-the-art LVLMs, we identify two fundamental limitations that prevent consistent spatial understanding across viewpoints.We hope SCOPE facilitates the diagnosis of spatial reasoning, serving as a stepping stone toward reliable embodied action.

Recent advances in large language models (LLMs) have improved logical reasoning by injecting formal logic or explicit structured representations. However, such methods often lose track of what is true now in multi-step reasoning, failing to maintain a coherent global state and its logical consequences. Motivated by Situation Model Theory in cognitive psychology, which views comprehension as constructing and updating a mental model of events along key dimensions (time, space, causality, intention, protagonist), we propose Situation Working Memory (SituW), a cognitively inspired method for contextual reasoning in LLMs. SituW first builds a situation representation by decomposing text along these five dimensions, then guides LLM inference with this evolving state. Keeping an explicit, dynamically updated situation memory instead of a static logical form encourages globally consistent reasoning over the situation model rather than raw text. Evaluated in both supervised and unsupervised settings, SituW improves accuracy by 23.3%p and 15.93%p while reducing “uncertain” predictions, suggesting that explicit situation modeling supports more globally consistent LLM reasoning.

In this work, we propose a Multi-LLM summarization framework, and investigate two different multi-LLM strategies including centralized and decentralized. Our multi-LLM summarization framework has two fundamentally important steps at each round of conversation: generation and evaluation. These steps are different depending on whether our multi-LLM decentralized summarization is used or centralized. In both our multi-LLM decentralized and centralized strategies, we have k different LLMs that generate diverse summaries of the text. However, during evaluation, our multi-LLM centralized summarization approach leverages a single LLM to evaluate the summaries and select the best one whereas k LLMs are used for decentralized multi-LLM summarization. Overall, we find that our multi-LLM summarization approaches significantly outperform the baselines that leverage only a single LLM by up to 3x. These results indicate the effectiveness of multi-LLM approaches for summarization.