Paper Detail

CXR-ContraBench: Benchmarking Negated-Option Attraction in Medical VLMs

Zhengru Fang, Yanan Ma, Yu Guo, Senkang Hu, Yixian Zhang, Hangcheng Cao, Wenbo Ding, Yuguang Fang

arxiv Score 9.0

Published 2026-05-07 · First seen 2026-05-09

Research Track A · General AI

Abstract

When a chest X-ray shows consolidation but the question asks which finding is present, a medical vision-language model may answer "No consolidation." This is more than an incorrect choice: it is a polarity reversal that emits a clinical statement contradicting the image. We study this failure as negated-option attraction, where a model is drawn to a negated answer option even when it conflicts with both the visual evidence and the question. We introduce CXR-ContraBench (Chest X-Ray Contradiction Benchmark), a diagnostic benchmark spanning internal ReXVQA slices and external OpenI and CheXpert protocols. The benchmark centers on present-finding questions, where selecting "No X" despite visible X creates the main clinical risk, and uses absent-finding questions as secondary tests of whether models copy negated wording. Across CheXpert protocols, the failure is substantial and persistent. On a strict direct presence probe, MedGemma and Qwen2.5-VL reach only 31.49% and 30.21% accuracy, respectively; on a matched 135,754-record CheXpert training-split protocol, both models select negated options on over 62% of presence questions. Chain-of-thought prompting reduces some presence-side reversals but does not eliminate them and can amplify absence-side contradictions. Finally, QCCV-Neg (Question-Conditioned Consistency Verifier for Negation) deterministically repairs the measured polarity-confused subset without retraining, raising MedGemma and Qwen2.5-VL to 96.60% and 95.32% accuracy on the direct presence probe. These results show that standard accuracy can hide a clinically meaningful inference-time polarity failure. Source code and benchmark construction scripts are available at https://github.com/fangzr/cxr-contrabench-code.

Workflow Status

Review status
pending
Role
unreviewed
Read priority
soon
Vote
Not set.
Saved
no
Collections
Not filed yet.
Next action
Not filled yet.

Reading Brief

No structured notes yet. Add `summary_sections`, `why_relevant`, `claim_impact`, or `next_action` in `papers.jsonl` to enrich this view.

Why It Surfaced

No ranking explanation is available yet.

Tags

No tags.

BibTeX

@article{fang2026cxr,
  title = {CXR-ContraBench: Benchmarking Negated-Option Attraction in Medical VLMs},
  author = {Zhengru Fang and Yanan Ma and Yu Guo and Senkang Hu and Yixian Zhang and Hangcheng Cao and Wenbo Ding and Yuguang Fang},
  year = {2026},
  abstract = {When a chest X-ray shows consolidation but the question asks which finding is present, a medical vision-language model may answer "No consolidation." This is more than an incorrect choice: it is a polarity reversal that emits a clinical statement contradicting the image. We study this failure as negated-option attraction, where a model is drawn to a negated answer option even when it conflicts with both the visual evidence and the question. We introduce CXR-ContraBench (Chest X-Ray Contradiction},
  url = {https://arxiv.org/abs/2605.05810},
  keywords = {cs.CV},
  eprint = {2605.05810},
  archiveprefix = {arXiv},
}

Metadata

{}