Multimodal Llms: Research Area — Prolific Citations Library

Discover 2 peer-reviewed studies in Multimodal Llms (2025). Explore research findings powered by Prolific's diverse participant panel.

This page lists 2 peer-reviewed papers in the research area of Multimodal Llms in the Prolific Citations Library, a curated collection of research powered by high-quality human data from Prolific.

Papers (2 of 2)

Visual cognition in multimodal large language models

Authors: LM Schulze Buschoff, E Akata, M Bethge

Year: 2025

Published in: Nature Machine ..., 2025 - nature.com

Institution: Max Planck Institute

Research Area: Visual Cognition, Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs), Vision-Language Models (VLMs)

Discipline: Cognitive Science, Artificial Intelligence, Computer Vision

Vision-based large language models show proficiency in visual data interpretation but fall short in human-like abilities for causal reasoning, intuitive physics, and social cognition.

Methods: Controlled experiments evaluating model performance on tasks related to intuitive physics, causal reasoning, and intuitive psychology using visual processing benchmarks.

Key Findings: Model capabilities in understanding physical interactions, causal relationships, and social preferences.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s42256-024-00963-y

Citations: 70
Multimodal large language models can make context-sensitive hate speech evaluations aligned with human judgement

Authors: T Davidson

Year: 2025

Published in: Nature Human Behaviour, 2025 - nature.com

Institution: University of Oxford, Davidson College

Research Area: Hate Speech Evaluation, Multimodal LLMs, Social Bias, Computational Law, AI Bias, AI Evaluation

Discipline: Artificial Intelligence

The study demonstrates that larger multimodal large language models (MLLMs) can align closely with human judgement in context-sensitive hate speech evaluations, though they still exhibit biases and limitations.

Methods: Conjoint experiments where simulated social media posts varying in attributes like slur usage and user demographics were evaluated by MLLMs and compared to human judgements.

Key Findings: The capacity of MLLMs to evaluate hate speech in a context-sensitive manner and their alignment with human judgement, while assessing biases and responsiveness to contextual cues.

Sample Size: 1854