Deep Supervised Cross-Modal Retrieval
Abstract
Cross-modal retrieval aims to enable flexible retrieval across different modalities. The core of cross-modal retrieval is how to measure the content similarity between different types of data. In this paper, we present a novel cross-modal retrieval method, called Deep Supervised Cross-modal Retrieval (DSCMR). It aims to find a common representation space, in which the samples from different modalities can be compared directly. Specifically, DSCMR minimises the discrimination loss in both the label space and the common representation space to supervise the model learning discriminative features. Furthermore, it simultaneously minimises the modality invariance loss and uses a weight sharing strategy to eliminate the cross-modal discrepancy of multimedia data in the common representation space to learn modality-invariant features. Comprehensive experimental results on four widely-used benchmark datasets demonstrate that the proposed method is effective in cross-modal learning and significantly outperforms the state-of-the-art cross-modal retrieval methods.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
MULTIBENCH currently does not include several important research areas outside of multimodal fusion, such as question answering, retrieval, grounding, and reinforcement learning.
“While MULTIBENCH currently does not include several important research areas outside of multimodal fusion (e.g., question answering [4, 63], retrieval [187], grounding [32], and reinforcement learning [110]), and is also limited by the models and metrics it supports, we outline our plan to expand in these directions in Appendix I.”
From MultiBench: Multiscale Benchmarks for Multimodal Representation Learning (2021) · cites this paper as [187]
There has been extensive research in defining objective functions to tackle the challenge of multimodal alignment: capturing a representation space where semantically similar concepts from different modalities are close together.
“There has been extensive research in defining objective functions to tackle the challenge of multimodal alignment: capturing a representation space where semantically similar concepts from different modalities are close together.”
From MultiBench: Multiscale Benchmarks for Multimodal Representation Learning (2021) · cites this paper as [187]
Cites
ImageNet classification with deep convolutional neural networks
Krizhevsky, A., Sutskever, I., & Hinton, G. E. (2017) · Communications of the ACM · doi:10.1145/3065386 · Cited by 112,155 · see citing works
Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimization
Kingma, D. P., & Ba, J. (2014) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1412.6980 · Cited by 98,946 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Scalable Deep Multimodal Learning for Cross-Modal Retrieval
Hu, P., Zhen, L., Peng, D., & Liu, P. (2019) · Proceedings of the 42nd International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval · doi:10.1145/3331184.3331213 · Cited by 136 · see citing works
Self-citationA survey of multimodal learning: Methods, applications, and future
Yuan, Y., Li, Z., & Zhao, B. (2025) · ACM Computing Surveys · doi:10.1145/3713070 · Cited by 90 · see citing works
Joint feature synthesis and embedding: Adversarial cross-modal retrieval revisited
Xu, X., Lin, K., Yang, Y., Hanjalic, A., & Shen, H. T. (2022) · IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence · doi:10.1109/tpami.2020.3045530 · Cited by 88 · see citing works
MultiBench: Multiscale Benchmarks for Multimodal Representation Learning
Liang, P. P., Lyu, Y., Fan, X., Wu, Z., Cheng, Y., Wu, J., Chen, L., Wu, P., Lee, M. A., Zhu, Y., et al. (2021) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2107.07502 · Cited by 85 · see citing works
“…M ULTI B ENCH currently does not include several important research areas outside of multimodal fusion (e.g., question answering [4, 63], retrieval [187], grounding [32], and reinforcement learning [110]), and is also limited by the models and metrics it supports, we outline our plan to expand in…”
Background
- Authors
- Zhen, L., Hu, P., Wang, X., & Peng, D.
- Affiliations
- Agency for Science, Technology and Research (SG)
- Sichuan University (CN)
- Venue
- 2019 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR)
- Publisher
- IEEE
- Published
- 2019-06
- Pages
- 10386-10395
- ISSN
- 1063-6919 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2967957126
- Cited by
- 478
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 26 · 2025: 69 · 2024: 95 · 2023: 78 · 2022: 85 · 2021: 82 · 2020: 36 · 2019: 7
- FWCI
- 17.11
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings - IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Image and Video Retrieval Techniques
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Multimodal Machine Learning Applications
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Image Retrieval and Classification Techniques
- Keywords
- cross-modal retrieval, modality invariance, parameter sharing, discriminative features, multimedia data
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