Sign inGet started
Paper · arXiv

Forged Peer Judgments Mislead Multimodal LLM Judge Panels: Source-Blind Anchoring and Panel-Consensus Verification

Multimodal LLM judge panels can cross-reference peers, but a quoted peer judgment may itself be untrusted. We expose source-blind anchoring as a text-level attack surface in vision-language model (VLM) panels. Quoting independent visual judgments creates large anchoring gaps (19--26 percentage points) under both self and peer framing. A matched-content, label-only control changes the broken rate by only $-0.17$pp (95\% CI $[-0.68,0.35]$), showing that the self/peer label itself does not explain the effect. Under our tested construction, deliberately generated, concise wrong quotes overturn originally-correct verdicts 1.5--2.7$\times$ more often than naturally occurring wrong peer statemen...

AuthorsYang Shu
Primary categorycs.CV
Published8 August 2026
Last updated at source8 August 2026
cs.CV
Embed this entry
<iframe src="https://silytics.si/embed/item/c4a5f7ba-f59d-4bc1-8273-dea07281357b" width="420" height="190" style="border:0" loading="lazy" title="Silytics entry"></iframe>

Free, no tracking. More about feeds and embeds.

Silytics shows public metadata from arXiv and links to the original. Information may be incomplete or out of date. Last refreshed 17 October 2026. Licenses and terms of the original apply to the work itself. Not financial, legal or professional advice.