RAVEN: Erasing Invisible Watermarks via Novel View Synthesis

Invisible watermarking has become a critical mechanism for authenticating AI-generated image content, with major platforms deploying watermarking schemes at scale. However, evaluating the vulnerability of these schemes against sophisticated removal attacks remains essential to assess their reliability and guide robust design. In this work, we expose a fundamental vulnerability in invisible watermarks by reformulating watermark removal as a view synthesis problem. Our key insight is that generating a perceptually consistent alternative view of the same semantic content, akin to re-observing a scene from a shifted perspective, naturally removes the embedded watermark while preserving visual fidelity. This reveals a critical gap: watermarks robust to pixel-space and frequency-domain attacks remain vulnerable to semantic-preserving viewpoint transformations. We introduce a zero-shot diffusion-based framework that applies controlled geometric transformations in latent space, augmented with view-guided correspondence attention to maintain structural consistency during reconstruction. Operating on frozen pre-trained models without detector access or watermark knowledge, our method achieves state-of-the-art watermark suppression across 15 watermarking methods--outperforming 14 baseline attacks while maintaining superior perceptual quality across multiple datasets.

Belief in Authority: Impact of Authority in Multi-Agent Evaluation Framework

Multi-agent systems utilizing large language models often assign authoritative roles to improve performance, yet the impact of authority bias on agent interactions remains underexplored. We present the first systematic analysis of role-based authority bias in free-form multi-agent evaluation using ChatEval. Applying French and Raven's power-based theory, we classify authoritative roles into legitimate, referent, and expert types and analyze their influence across 12-turn conversations. Experiments with GPT-4o and DeepSeek R1 reveal that Expert and Referent power roles exert stronger influence than Legitimate power roles. Crucially, authority bias emerges not through active conformity by general agents, but through authoritative roles consistently maintaining their positions while general agents demonstrate flexibility. Furthermore, authority influence requires clear position statements, as neutral responses fail to generate bias. These findings provide key insights for designing multi-agent frameworks with asymmetric interaction patterns.

An Analysis of Architectural Impact on LLM-based Abstract Visual Reasoning: A Systematic Benchmark on RAVEN-FAIR

This study aims to systematically evaluate the performance of large language models (LLMs) in abstract visual reasoning problems. We examined four LLM models (GPT-4.1-Mini, Claude-3.5-Haiku, Gemini-1.5-Flash, Llama-3.3-70b) utilizing four different reasoning architectures (single-shot, embedding-controlled repetition, self-reflection, and multi-agent) on the RAVEN-FAIR dataset. Visual responses generated through a three-stage process (JSON extraction, LLM reasoning, and Tool Function) were evaluated using SSIM and LPIPS metrics; Chain-of-Thought scores and error types (semantic hallucination, numeric misperception) were analyzed. Results demonstrate that GPT-4.1-Mini consistently achieved the highest overall accuracy across all architectures, indicating a strong reasoning capability. While the multi-agent architecture occasionally altered semantic and numeric balance across models, these effects were not uniformly beneficial. Instead, each model exhibited distinct sensitivity patterns to architectural design, underscoring that reasoning effectiveness remains model-specific. Variations in response coverage further emerged as a confounding factor that complicates direct cross-architecture comparison. To estimate the upper-bound performance of each configuration, we report the best of five independent runs, representing a best-case scenario rather than an averaged outcome. This multi-run strategy aligns with recent recommendations, which emphasize that single-run evaluations are fragile and may lead to unreliable conclusions.

On the Measure of a Model: From Intelligence to Generality

Benchmarks such as ARC, Raven-inspired tests, and the Blackbird Task are widely used to evaluate the intelligence of large language models (LLMs). Yet, the concept of intelligence remains elusive- lacking a stable definition and failing to predict performance on practical tasks such as question answering, summarization, or coding. Optimizing for such benchmarks risks misaligning evaluation with real-world utility. Our perspective is that evaluation should be grounded in generality rather than abstract notions of intelligence. We identify three assumptions that often underpin intelligence-focused evaluation: generality, stability, and realism. Through conceptual and formal analysis, we show that only generality withstands conceptual and empirical scrutiny. Intelligence is not what enables generality; generality is best understood as a multitask learning problem that directly links evaluation to measurable performance breadth and reliability. This perspective reframes how progress in AI should be assessed and proposes generality as a more stable foundation for evaluating capability across diverse and evolving tasks.

RAVEN: Query-Guided Representation Alignment for Question Answering over Audio, Video, Embedded Sensors, and Natural Language

Multimodal question answering (QA) often requires identifying which video, audio, or sensor tokens are relevant to the question. Yet modality disagreements are common: off-camera speech, background noise, or motion outside the field of view often mislead fusion models that weight all streams equally. We present RAVEN, a unified QA architecture whose core is QuART, a query-conditioned cross-modal gating module that assigns scalar relevance scores to each token across modalities, enabling the model to amplify informative signals and suppress distractors before fusion. RAVEN is trained through a three-stage pipeline comprising unimodal pretraining, query-aligned fusion, and disagreement-oriented fine-tuning -- each stage targeting a distinct challenge in multi-modal reasoning: representation quality, cross-modal relevance, and robustness to modality mismatch. To support training and evaluation, we release AVS-QA, a dataset of 300K synchronized Audio--Video-Sensor streams paired with automatically generated question-answer pairs. Experimental results on seven multi-modal QA benchmarks -- including egocentric and exocentric tasks -- show that RAVEN achieves up to 14.5\% and 8.0\% gains in accuracy compared to state-of-the-art multi-modal large language models, respectively. Incorporating sensor data provides an additional 16.4\% boost, and the model remains robust under modality corruption, outperforming SOTA baselines by 50.23\%. Our code and dataset are available at https://github.com/BASHLab/RAVEN.

Beyond Perception: Evaluating Abstract Visual Reasoning through Multi-Stage Task

Current Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) excel in general visual reasoning but remain underexplored in Abstract Visual Reasoning (AVR), which demands higher-order reasoning to identify abstract rules beyond simple perception. Existing AVR benchmarks focus on single-step reasoning, emphasizing the end result but neglecting the multi-stage nature of reasoning process. Past studies found MLLMs struggle with these benchmarks, but it doesn't explain how they fail. To address this gap, we introduce MultiStAR, a Multi-Stage AVR benchmark, based on RAVEN, designed to assess reasoning across varying levels of complexity. Additionally, existing metrics like accuracy only focus on the final outcomes while do not account for the correctness of intermediate steps. Therefore, we propose a novel metric, MSEval, which considers the correctness of intermediate steps in addition to the final outcomes. We conduct comprehensive experiments on MultiStAR using 17 representative close-source and open-source MLLMs. The results reveal that while existing MLLMs perform adequately on basic perception tasks, they continue to face challenges in more complex rule detection stages.

Advancing Generalization Across a Variety of Abstract Visual Reasoning Tasks

The abstract visual reasoning (AVR) domain presents a diverse suite of analogy-based tasks devoted to studying model generalization. Recent years have brought dynamic progress in the field, particularly in i.i.d. scenarios, in which models are trained and evaluated on the same data distributions. Nevertheless, o.o.d. setups that assess model generalization to new test distributions remain challenging even for the most recent models. To advance generalization in AVR tasks, we present the Pathways of Normalized Group Convolution model (PoNG), a novel neural architecture that features group convolution, normalization, and a parallel design. We consider a wide set of AVR benchmarks, including Raven's Progressive Matrices and visual analogy problems with both synthetic and real-world images. The experiments demonstrate strong generalization capabilities of the proposed model, which in several settings outperforms the existing literature methods.

Can Large Reasoning Models do Analogical Reasoning under Perceptual Uncertainty?

This work presents a first evaluation of two state-of-the-art Large Reasoning Models (LRMs), OpenAI's o3-mini and DeepSeek R1, on analogical reasoning, focusing on well-established nonverbal human IQ tests based on Raven's progressive matrices. We benchmark with the I-RAVEN dataset and its more difficult extension, I-RAVEN-X, which tests the ability to generalize to longer reasoning rules and ranges of the attribute values. To assess the influence of visual uncertainties on these nonverbal analogical reasoning tests, we extend the I-RAVEN-X dataset, which otherwise assumes an oracle perception. We adopt a two-fold strategy to simulate this imperfect visual perception: 1) we introduce confounding attributes which, being sampled at random, do not contribute to the prediction of the correct answer of the puzzles and 2) smoothen the distributions of the input attributes' values. We observe a sharp decline in OpenAI's o3-mini task accuracy, dropping from 86.6% on the original I-RAVEN to just 17.0% -- approaching random chance -- on the more challenging I-RAVEN-X, which increases input length and range and emulates perceptual uncertainty. This drop occurred despite spending 3.4x more reasoning tokens. A similar trend is also observed for DeepSeek R1: from 80.6% to 23.2%. On the other hand, a neuro-symbolic probabilistic abductive model, ARLC, that achieves state-of-the-art performances on I-RAVEN, can robustly reason under all these out-of-distribution tests, maintaining strong accuracy with only a modest reduction from 98.6% to 88.0%. Our code is available at https://github.com/IBM/raven-large-language-models.

Propaganda via AI? A Study on Semantic Backdoors in Large Language Models

Large language models (LLMs) demonstrate remarkable performance across myriad language tasks, yet they remain vulnerable to backdoor attacks, where adversaries implant hidden triggers that systematically manipulate model outputs. Traditional defenses focus on explicit token-level anomalies and therefore overlook semantic backdoors-covert triggers embedded at the conceptual level (e.g., ideological stances or cultural references) that rely on meaning-based cues rather than lexical oddities. We first show, in a controlled finetuning setting, that such semantic backdoors can be implanted with only a small poisoned corpus, establishing their practical feasibility. We then formalize the notion of semantic backdoors in LLMs and introduce a black-box detection framework, RAVEN (short for "Response Anomaly Vigilance for uncovering semantic backdoors"), which combines semantic entropy with cross-model consistency analysis. The framework probes multiple models with structured topic-perspective prompts, clusters the sampled responses via bidirectional entailment, and flags anomalously uniform outputs; cross-model comparison isolates model-specific anomalies from corpus-wide biases. Empirical evaluations across diverse LLM families (GPT-4o, Llama, DeepSeek, Mistral) uncover previously undetected semantic backdoors, providing the first proof-of-concept evidence of these hidden vulnerabilities and underscoring the urgent need for concept-level auditing of deployed language models. We open-source our code and data at https://github.com/NayMyatMin/RAVEN.

GenVP: Generating Visual Puzzles with Contrastive Hierarchical VAEs

Raven's Progressive Matrices (RPMs) is an established benchmark to examine the ability to perform high-level abstract visual reasoning (AVR). Despite the current success of algorithms that solve this task, humans can generalize beyond a given puzzle and create new puzzles given a set of rules, whereas machines remain locked in solving a fixed puzzle from a curated choice list. We propose Generative Visual Puzzles (GenVP), a framework to model the entire RPM generation process, a substantially more challenging task. Our model's capability spans from generating multiple solutions for one specific problem prompt to creating complete new puzzles out of the desired set of rules. Experiments on five different datasets indicate that GenVP achieves state-of-the-art (SOTA) performance both in puzzle-solving accuracy and out-of-distribution (OOD) generalization in 22 OOD scenarios. Compared to SOTA generative approaches, which struggle to solve RPMs when the feasible solution space increases, GenVP efficiently generalizes to these challenging setups. Moreover, our model demonstrates the ability to produce a wide range of complete RPMs given a set of abstract rules by effectively capturing the relationships between abstract rules and visual object properties.