arXiv (All)
open access
Vision-language models see more about agriculture than they report, and test-time scaling remains bounded by parametric knowledge
Vision-language models (VLMs) show promise for agricultural diagnosis but fail unpredictably in zero-shot settings. We test whether this stems from poor visual features or an inability to verbalize what the model already perceives, using a benchmark spanning classification and detection drawn from 1
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- Vision-language models know more about agriculture than they show and rubric-grounded verifications close the gap#1110346
- Image Recognition with Vision and Language Embeddings of VLMs#1248289
- Detect Before You Leap: Mirage Detection in Vision-Language Models#1012219
- SalQ-VLM: Fine-Grained Saliency-Guided Quantization for Vision-Language Models#1049655
- One Geometry, Different Outcomes: Readout-Dependent Effects of the Modality Gap in Vision-Language Models#1130943
Record · ID 1401843
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive