Muhammad Bilal
Publications
On the Robustness of Temporal Vision-Language Models for Surgical Endoscopy Videos
Temporal vision-language models (TVLMs) offer a reusable, prompt-based interface for surgical video understanding, yet, their robustness under clinically realistic acquisition artifacts in endoscopy remains insufficiently characterized. In practice, degradations such as defocus, haze, motion blur, noise, cautery smoke, and packet loss introduce structured distribution shifts which may compromise video-text alignment. We study the robustness of temporal VLMs under such shifts caused by corruptions in clip frames. We introduce Endo-C6, a compact corruption benchmark of six endoscopy-realistic perturbations evaluated at a fixed high severity, and apply it to public Gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy and laparoscopic cholecystectomy videos. Under a standardized prompt protocol, we benchmark 3 recent surgical TVLM baselines and analyze robustness in both mean and worst-case settings, spanning 294 dataset-level evaluations. Finally, we present RobustEndoCLIP, obtained by few-shot parameter-efficient tuning with VeRA, outperforming existing TVLM baselines. Our findings show that off-the-shelf TVLMs can exhibit severe worst-case collapse under endoscopy-specific corruptions, whereas lightweight few-shot adaptation can substantially improve corrupted performance and robustness without changing the prompt-based interface. We expect Endo-C6 to support standardized robustness reporting and promote more reliable clinical vision-language systems.
MedObvious: Exposing the Medical Moravec's Paradox in VLMs via Clinical Triage
Vision Language Models (VLMs) are increasingly used for tasks like medical report generation and visual question answering. However, fluent diagnostic text does not guarantee safe visual understanding. In clinical practice, interpretation begins with pre-diagnostic sanity checks: verifying that the input is valid to read (correct modality and anatomy, plausible viewpoint and orientation, and no obvious integrity violations). Existing benchmarks largely assume this step is solved, and therefore miss a critical failure mode: a model can produce plausible narratives even when the input is inconsistent or invalid. We introduce MedObvious, a 1,880-task benchmark that isolates input validation as a set-level consistency capability over small multi-panel image sets: the model must identify whether any panel violates expected coherence. MedObvious spans five progressive tiers, from basic orientation/modality mismatches to clinically motivated anatomy/viewpoint verification and triage-style cues, and includes five evaluation formats to test robustness across interfaces. Evaluating 17 different VLMs, we find that sanity checking remains unreliable: several models hallucinate anomalies on normal (negative-control) inputs, performance degrades when scaling to larger image sets, and measured accuracy varies substantially between multiple-choice and open-ended settings. These results show that pre-diagnostic verification remains unsolved for medical VLMs and should be treated as a distinct, safety-critical capability before deployment.