Focus your attention: A focal attention for multimodal learning
Abstract
The key point in multimodal learning is to learn semantic alignment that finds the correspondence between sub-elements of instances from different modality data. Attention mechanism has shown its power in semantic alignment learning as it enables to densely associate sub-elements across different modalities. However, for each sub-element, existing attention aligns it with all the sub-elements from another modality, while most of them have no correspondence with it, i.e. irrelevant sub-elements. The irrelevant sub-elements will distract the semantic alignment if they are also attended. In this paper, we propose a novel focal attention mechanism to learn more accurate semantic alignment. The focal attention sparsely attends to a subset of sub-elements, which are identified as relevant ones according to their posterior probabilities given each sub-element from another modality. Based on the observation that relevant sub-elements mostly describe the same semantic, the posterior probability can precisely distinguish relevant and irrelevant ones by taking interactions within the same modality into consideration, such that relevant sub-elements get higher and closer posterior probabilities, while irrelevant ones get lower probabilities. Such a design learns better semantic alignment by preventing the interference of irrelevant sub-elements, and it facilitates subsequent multimodal tasks that demand semantic alignment. To validate the effectiveness of the focal attention, we conduct extensive experiments on image-text matching and text-to-image generation, and we propose a bidirectional and stacked version of focal attention for them, respectively. Experimental results on benchmarks show that the focal attention can significantly and consistently outperform state-of-the-arts.
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?
GNN-based methods model multimodal data through graph structures, enhancing global and robust semantic understanding.
“GNN-based methods [52,53] model multimodal data through graph structures, enhancing global and robust semantic understanding.”
From Multimodal fusion and vision–language models: A survey for robot vision (2026) · cites this paper as [52]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 62 · Cited by 17
- Authors
- Liu, C., Mao, Z., Zhang, T., Liu, A.-A., Wang, B., & Zhang, Y.
- Affiliations
- University of Science and Technology of China (CN)
- Tianjin University (CN)
- Xiaomi (China) (CN)
- Venue
- IEEE Transactions on Multimedia
- Published
- 2022
- Volume
- 24
- Pages
- 103-115
- ISSN
- 1520-9210 (ISSN-L)
- 1941-0077
- OpenAlex
- W3115819524
- Cited by
- 17
- References
- 62
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 2
- FWCI
- 0.58
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- Locations
- IEEE Transactions on Multimedia (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Key Research and Development Program of China (2020YFB1406603)
- National Natural Science Foundation of China (U19A2057)
- National Science Fund for Distinguished Young Scholars (61525206)
- Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (WK3480000008)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Multimodal Machine Learning Applications
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Image and Video Retrieval Techniques
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Domain Adaptation and Few-Shot Learning
- Keywords
- focal attention, multimodal learning, semantic alignment, attention mechanism, posterior probability, image-text matching, text-to-image generation, bidirectional attention
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