Recent work has investigated Omni-modal Large Language Models (OLLMs), models which can take multiple modalities and their combinations as input, as a way forward to have systems really capable of interacting with their environment. Uncertainty quantification (UQ) for OLLMs, however, remains an open problem: existing methods largely target at most two modalities at a time, require access to model internals, or re-invocation of the evaluated model. We propose a model-agnostic UQ framework that scores a Chain-of-Thought response entirely through external omni-modal embeddings, measuring the grounding of the reasoning in the multimodal input and its internal coherence. Our contribution is the family of signals and an empirical characterisation of when it is reliable, rather than any single estimator: we find the geometric scores to be largely redundant with one another (mean within-split rank correlation 0.91-0.94) but strongly complementary to answer-dispersion baselines, and their reliability to depend on the generator and the modality. The resulting confidence estimates require no access to logits, hidden states or gradients of the evaluated model and no additional inference from it; they do require segmenting the reasoning trace with an auxiliary model and, for the aggregated score, a labelled calibration set that we show can be as small as 25 examples (although we also show that such a set buys little over fixing one signal a priori). On UNO-Bench, with both a closed and an open model, our scores yield small gains over self-consistency (systematic with the closed generator, mixed with the open one) and are competitive with self-verbalisation and internal-state baselines, especially in open-ended, omni-modal questions where previous state-of-the-art baselines struggle.

翻译：暂无翻译