Papers › Rethinking Visual Attribution for Chest X-ray Reasoning in Large Vision Language Models

Rethinking Visual Attribution for Chest X-ray Reasoning in Large Vision Language Models

19 May 2026arXiv:2605.20158added by Syntology

Guangzhi Xiong, Qiao Jin, Sanchit Sinha, Zhiyong Lu, Aidong Zhang

Title, abstract, authors and date from arXiv's metadata (CC0); this paper is not in the Papers with Code archive (frozen 2025-07-28).

Large Vision Language Models (LVLMs) show promise in medical applications, but their inability to faithfully ground responses in visual evidence raises serious concerns about clinical trustworthiness. While visual attribution methods are widely used to explain LVLM predictions, whether these explanations actually reflect the visual evidence underlying the model's decision is largely unverified, since ground-truth annotations for internal model reasoning are typically unavailable. We address this question for chest X-ray (CXR) reasoning by developing a causal evaluation framework that retains only CXR-VQA samples for which the expert-annotated region is verified, via counterfactual editing, to be causally responsible for the model's prediction. Using this framework across 11 attribution methods, six open-source LVLMs, and two output modes (direct answer and step-by-step reasoning), we find that existing attribution methods often fail to identify the evidence used by LVLMs. To address this failure, we propose MedFocus, a concept-based attribution method that localizes clinically meaningful anatomical regions via unbalanced optimal transport and measures their causal effect on model outputs through targeted interventions. MedFocus produces spatial, concept-level, and token-level attributions and substantially outperforms prior methods, taking a step toward more trustworthy attribution for medical LVLMs. Our data and code are available at https://github.com/gzxiong/medfocus/.

PaperPDFCode Syntology ran

In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.

For agents, Syntology's MCP tool lists every function and class Syntology harvested from this paper and whether it ran (how to connect): get_harvested_code_for_paper(arxiv_id="2605.20158")

Code

Syntology Ran 3 of 5 code samples harvested from 1 repository linked to this paper; 2 have no recorded run. Of those that ran: 3 ran with no contract checked.

By repository: found in paper text by Syntology: 5 samples from 1 repository, 3 ran. The run record, sample by sample. “Ran” means executed on a synthesized input, not that the code is correct or reproduces the paper.

gzxiong/medfocus found in paper text by Syntology report

Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.

Code Syntology ran Syntology

5 samples harvested; 3 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 2 have no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-24; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.

3ran
2unverified

Licence: 0 of the 5 samples are pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.

Harvested from gzxiong/medfocus. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.

Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.

Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.

load_medfocus gzxiong/medfocus/medfocus/config.py found in paper text by Syntology ran MIT (permissive) · 3a93f131e45db10d · report
load_models gzxiong/medfocus/medfocus/config.py found in paper text by Syntology ran MIT (permissive) · 67d92ceb8287dd78 · report
overlay_boxes gzxiong/medfocus/medfocus/attribution/visualization.py found in paper text by Syntology ran MIT (permissive) · e29e667b66eddee5 · report
get_model_spec gzxiong/medfocus/medfocus/lvlm/registry.py found in paper text by Syntology unverified MIT (permissive) · 9ba8f6b71d963c0d · report
map_mask_through_ot gzxiong/medfocus/medfocus/ot/mapping.py found in paper text by Syntology unverified MIT (permissive) · 38364efb53297836 · report

Results from the paper

The Papers with Code archive ends with its 2025-07-28 snapshot. This paper's arXiv identifier, 2605.20158, was issued in May 2026, after that date, so the archive has no leaderboard rows for it.

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections