Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) frequently produce hallucinations (i.e., assertions that contradict the image or facts), undermining reliability in high-risk applications. Existing detection approaches typically feed images and texts jointly and estimate hallucination scores by measuring the consistency of model outputs. However, because the visual module often lags behind the language module in understanding and reasoning, MLLMs can repeatedly produce similar yet incorrect answers, yielding overestimated trustworthiness and missed detections. To address this, we propose a simple yet effective model-agnostic method, dubbed Decoupled Object-level Understanding and Bridging via vMF-based Trustworthiness (DOUBT). DOUBT first employs Object-level Understanding and Bridging (OUB), a two-step prompting scheme that decouples object recognition from relational reasoning by prompting the model to identify objects and then reason based on them. It further introduces a von Mises-Fisher (vMF)-based trustworthiness metric, which is more stable than semantic entropy metrics in small-sample settings. Extensive experiments and ablation studies on multiple benchmarks show that DOUBT consistently outperforms state-of-the-art baselines, demonstrating its robustness and generalizability for hallucination detection in MLLMs. The code is available at https://github.com/XLearning-SCU/2026-ICML-DOUBT.

What does it mean to understand the world? Is it simply to predict future video frames? Developmental cognitive science suggests that understanding the world is fundamentally the process of constructing internal theories of how it works rather than mere prediction, even before language is acquired. However, in machine learning, it remains unclear how to endow AI systems with such theory-building capability from raw, non-textual observation alone. In this paper, we introduce Learning-to-Theorize (L2T), a learning paradigm in which an AI system acquires the ability to construct theories represented as executable programs directly from observation alone. To instantiate this paradigm, we propose the Neural Language-of-Thought Programmer, a neural model that induces and executes latent programs as explanations rather than task-specific predictors or policies. In experiments, we show that this formulation enables explanation-driven generalization, allowing observations to be understood in terms of the programs that generate them.

Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly used for zero-shot annotation and LLM-as-a-judge tasks, yet their reliability hinges on how model-internalized priors interact with user-provided instructions. We investigate three dimensions of this interaction: (1) how an LLM's familiarity with data and task definitions affects performance, (2) the extent to which additional information in prompts can correct zero-shot errors (``decision stickiness''), and (3) model susceptibility to misaligned task definitions. Through experiments on toxicity detection across diverse datasets (spanning social media, gaming, news, and forums) using both dense and mixture-of-experts models, we find that nearly two-thirds of zero-shot errors are resistant to correction, with an overall rescue rate (fraction of initial errors corrected by prompting) of only 34.8\%. High-confidence errors prove especially resistant to correction. When given misaligned definitions, LLMs follow them while maintaining confidence levels unchanged from the aligned condition. Crucially, we introduce Definition-Specific Familiarity (DSF), which measures alignment between a model's internal concept and the task definition. After controlling for dataset-level confounds, DSF shows a positive association with model performance (partial $r=+0.41$), while three distinct memorization metrics (ROUGE-L, BERTScore, and embedding cosine similarity) all fail to show a positive association. These findings show the limitations of prompt-based correction in annotation tasks, highlighting the importance of definition alignment over text-level memorization.

Token attribution methods provide intuitive explanations for language model outputs by identifying causally important input tokens. However, as modern LLMs increasingly rely on extended reasoning chains, existing schemes face two critical challenges: (1) efficiency bottleneck, where attributing a target span of $M$ tokens within a context of length $N$ requires $\mathcal{O}(M \cdot N)$ operations, making long-context attribution prohibitively slow; and (2) faithfulness drop, where intermediate reasoning tokens absorb attribution mass, preventing importance from propagating back to the original input. To address these, we introduce FlashTrace, an efficient multi-token attribution method that employs span-wise aggregation to compute attribution over multi-token targets in a single pass, while maintaining faithfulness. Moreover, we design a recursive attribution mechanism that traces importance through intermediate reasoning chains back to source inputs. Extensive experiments on long-context retrieval (RULER) and multi-step reasoning (MATH, MorehopQA) tasks demonstrate that FlashTrace achieves over $130\times$ speedup over existing baselines while maintaining superior faithfulness. We further analyze the dynamics of recursive attribution, showing that even a single recursive hop improves faithfulness by tracing importance through the reasoning chain.