Cited by 535Multimodal Machine Learning ApplicationsDomain Adaptation and Few-Shot LearningAdvanced Image and Video Retrieval Techniques

Deep Multimodal Representation Learning: A Survey

Open access
Guo, Wenzhong, Wang, Jianwen, Wang, Shiping·2019·IEEE Access

Abstract

Multimodal representation learning, which aims to narrow the heterogeneity gap among different modalities, plays an indispensable role in the utilization of ubiquitous multimodal data. Due to the powerful representation ability with multiple levels of abstraction, deep learning-based multimodal representation learning has attracted much attention in recent years. In this paper, we provided a comprehensive survey on deep multimodal representation learning which has never been concentrated entirely. To facilitate the discussion on how the heterogeneity gap is narrowed, according to the underlying structures in which different modalities are integrated, we category deep multimodal representation learning methods into three frameworks: joint representation, coordinated representation, and encoder-decoder. Additionally, we review some typical models in this area ranging from conventional models to newly developed technologies. This paper highlights on the key issues of newly developed technologies, such as encoder-decoder model, generative adversarial networks, and attention mechanism in a multimodal representation learning perspective, which, to the best of our knowledge, have never been reviewed previously, even though they have become the major focuses of much contemporary research. For each framework or model, we discuss its basic structure, learning objective, application scenes, key issues, advantages, and disadvantages, such that both novel and experienced researchers can benefit from this survey. Finally, we suggest some important directions for future work.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/access.2019.2916887

Cites

154 of 154 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • BERT-style cross-modal pretraining models produce excellent results on various downstream vision-language tasks but fail to be applied to generative tasks directly.

    “while the BERT-style cross-modal pretraining models produce excellent results on various down-stream visionlanguage tasks, they fail to be applied to generative tasks directly.”

    From Multimodal learning with transformers: A survey (2023) · cites this paper as [208]

  • Masked language and region modelling as pre-training tasks have the main advantage that the Transformer encoder learned from these supervisions can encode both vision and language patterns based on bidirectional context and is naturally fit for semantic understanding tasks.

    “As discussed in [208], the masked language and region modelling as pre-training task have a main advantage that the Transformer encoder learned from these supervisions can encode both vision and language patterns based on bidirectional context and it is naturally fit for the semantic understanding tasks, e.g., VQA, image-text retrieval.”

    From Multimodal learning with transformers: A survey (2023) · cites this paper as [208]

  • Both VideoBERT and CBT have to train a separate video-to-text decoder for video captioning.

    “As discussed in [208], both VideoBERT [7] and CBT [107] have to train a separate video-to-text decoder for video captioning.”

    From Multimodal learning with transformers: A survey (2023) · cites this paper as [208]

  • XGPT is tailor-made for image captioning, to overcome the limitation that BERT-based cross-modal pretrained models fail to be applied to generative tasks directly.

    “XGPT [208] is tailor-made for image captioning, to overcome the limitation that BERT-based cross-modal pretrained models fail to be applied to generative tasks directly.”

    From Multimodal learning with transformers: A survey (2023) · cites this paper as [208]

  • Down-stream task-agnostic pretraining is optional, not necessary, and down-stream task specific pretraining is widely studied.

    “In practices of multimodal Transformers, the aforementioned down-stream task -agnostic pretraining is optional, not necessary, and down-stream task specific pretraining is also widely studied [150], [190], [208], [211].”

    From Multimodal learning with transformers: A survey (2023) · cites this paper as [208]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 17

  1. Y. Li, M. Yang, and Z. Zhang. (2016). ''A survey of multi-view represen- tation learning.'' [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/1610.01206 · arXiv
  2. R. Sennrich, B. Haddow, and A. Birch, ''Neural machine translation of rare words with subword units,'' in Proc. 54th Annu. Meeting Assoc. Comput. Linguistics, vol. 1, 2016, pp. 1715-1725.
  3. M. Schuster and K. K. Paliwal, ''Bidirectional recurrent neural net- works,'' IEEE Trans. Signal Process., vol. 45, no. 11, pp. 2673-2681, Nov. 1997.
  4. A. Gretton, K. M. Borgwardt, M. J. Rasch, B. Schölkopf, and A. Smola, ''A kernel two-sample test,'' J. Mach. Learn. Res., vol. 13, pp. 723-773, Mar. 2012.
  5. N. Mor, L. Wolf, A. Polyak, and Y. Taigman. (2018). ''A universal music translation network.'' [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/ 1805.07848
  6. K. Papineni, S. Roukos, T. Ward, and W.-J. Zhu, ''BLEU: A method for automatic evaluation of machine translation,'' in Proc. 40th Annu. Meeting Assoc. Comput. Linguistics, 2002, pp. 311-318.
  7. N. Srivastava and R. R. Salakhutdinov, ''Multimodal learning with deep Boltzmann machines,'' in Proc. Adv. Neural Inf. Process. Syst., 2012, pp. 2222-2230.
  8. C. K. I. Williams and M. Seeger, ''Using the Nyström method to speed up kernel machines,'' in Proc. Adv. Neural Inf. Process. Syst., 2001, pp. 682-688.
  9. Y. Takashima, T. Takiguchi, Y. Ariki, and K. Omori, ''Audio-visual speech recognition for a person with severe hearing loss using deep canonical correlation analysis,'' in Proc. 1st Int. Workshop Challenges Hearing Assistive Technol., 2017, pp. 77-81.
  10. A. Radford, L. Metz, and S. Chintala, ''Unsupervised representation learning with deep convolutional generative adversarial networks,'' in Proc. Int. Conf. Learn. Represent., 2016, pp. 1-16.
  11. X. Chen, Y. Duan, R. Houthooft, J. Schulman, I. Sutskever, and P. Abbeel, ''InfoGAN: Interpretable representation learning by information maximizing generative adversarial nets,'' in Proc. 30th Int. Conf. Neural Inf. Process. Syst., 2016, pp. 2172-2180.
  12. V. Dumoulin et al., ''Adversarially learned inference,'' in Proc. Int. Conf. Learn. Represent., 2017, pp. 1-18.
  13. J. Donahue, P. Krähenbuhl, and T. Darrell, ''Adversarial feature learning,'' in Proc. Int. Conf. Learn. Represent., 2017, pp. 1-18.
  14. S. E. Reed, Z. Akata, S. Mohan, S. Tenka, B. Schiele, and H. Lee, ''Learning what and where to draw,'' in Proc. Adv. Neural Inf. Process. Syst., 2016, pp. 217-225.
  15. T. Salimans, I. Goodfellow, W. Zaremba, V. Cheung, A. Radford, and X. Chen, ''Improved techniques for training GANs,'' in Proc. Adv. Neural Inf. Process. Syst., 2016, pp. 2234-2242.
  16. L. Metz, B. Poole, D. Pfau, and J. Sohl-Dickstein, ''Unrolled genera- tive adversarial networks,'' in Proc. Int. Conf. Learn. Represent., 2017, pp. 1-25.
  17. A. Vaswani et al., ''Attention is all you need,'' in Proc. Adv. Neural Inf. Process. Syst., 2017, pp. 5998-6008.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Guo, W., Wang, J., & Wang, S.
Affiliations
  • Fuzhou University (CN)
  • Fujian Normal University (CN)
Venue
IEEE Access
Published
2019
Volume
7
Pages
63373-63394
ISSN
2169-3536 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2946165673
Cited by
535
References
154
Citations by year
2026: 68 · 2025: 92 · 2024: 101 · 2023: 104 · 2022: 84 · 2021: 54 · 2020: 31 · 2019: 1
FWCI
18.99
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • IEEE Access (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • National Natural Science Foundation of China (61502104, 61672159)
  • Fujian Collaborative Innovation Center for Big Data Application in Governments
  • Technology Innovation Platform Project of Fujian Province (2014H2005)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Multimodal Machine Learning Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Domain Adaptation and Few-Shot Learning
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Image and Video Retrieval Techniques
Keywords
multimodal representation learning, deep learning, modality heterogeneity, joint representation learning, encoder-decoder architecture, generative adversarial networks, attention mechanism, multimodal data integration

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review