Enhancing Vision Language Models with Logic Reasoning for Situational Awareness
Pavana Pradeep, Krishna Kant, Suya Yu
TL;DR
The paper tackles vision-language model–based situational awareness for infrequent but critical events by integrating VLMs with traditional computer vision through explicit logic reasoning. It introduces a consistency-driven fine-tuning framework that uses main, auxiliary, and proxy task structures, grounded in SMT-based reasoning, to guide directed FT and enable inference-time justifications. Across TU_DAT, Taekwondo, and Kinetics datasets, the directed FT approach consistently yields higher classification accuracy and CIF scores than undirected FT, while incurring manageable overhead; the method scales across image-, video-, and non-transformer VLMs. Practically, this framework improves reliability in SA tasks and provides a principled mechanism to justify or question model outputs in real time, with potential for sub-second inference using newer hardware. The work also highlights tradeoffs such as catastrophic forgetting and the additional resources required for running auxiliary reasoning components.
Abstract
Vision-Language Models (VLMs) offer the ability to generate high-level, interpretable descriptions of complex activities from images and videos, making them valuable for situational awareness (SA) applications. In such settings, the focus is on identifying infrequent but significant events with high reliability and accuracy, while also extracting fine-grained details and assessing recognition quality. In this paper, we propose an approach that integrates VLMs with traditional computer vision methods through explicit logic reasoning to enhance SA in three key ways: (a) extracting fine-grained event details, (b) employing an intelligent fine-tuning (FT) strategy that achieves substantially higher accuracy than uninformed selection, and (c) generating justifications for VLM outputs during inference. We demonstrate that our intelligent FT mechanism improves the accuracy and provides a valuable means, during inferencing, to either confirm the validity of the VLM output or indicate why it may be questionable.
