Note: The boldfaced portion of the passage is missing. However, the answer choices strongly suggest the claim was about "data fabrication" (a term for AI generating false information or "hallucinating"). A plausible claim would be: **"Multimodal AI offers a potential solution to the problem of data fabrication."** This solution assumes such a claim was made.
Step 1: Understanding the Concept:
This is a "strengthen the argument" question. We need to find a piece of evidence that would provide the best support for the assumed claim about multimodal models and data fabrication.
Step 2: Detailed Explanation:
If the claim is that multimodal models can help with data fabrication, we need an answer that explains the mechanism by which they could do this. How could a model with vision and other senses be better at detecting false information? It could cross-reference information from different modalities. For example, if a text claims "The Eiffel Tower is blue," a multimodal model could check that claim against an image of the Eiffel Tower.
(A) This is about generating narratives, not detecting fabrication.
(B) This is about fabricating physical objects, a different meaning of the word "fabrication."
(C) This is the correct answer. It provides the specific mechanism. By processing sensory inputs (e.g., seeing an image, hearing a sound), the model can check textual claims against real-world data, allowing it to "detect data fabrication." This directly supports the idea that multimodality helps solve the problem.
(D) This discusses a limitation of language-only models but doesn't explain how multimodal models are better.
(E) This restates the claim as a "practical motivation" but doesn't provide supporting evidence for \textit{how} it would work.
Step 3: Final Answer:
Assuming the claim is about multimodal AI helping to solve data fabrication, option (C) provides the strongest support by explaining the mechanism: using sensory inputs to verify information and detect falsehoods.