CoChat
Sign Up
PreprintCited by 1,977Multimodal Machine Learning ApplicationsImage Retrieval and Classification TechniquesDomain Adaptation and Few-Shot Learning

The DOI matches its DataCite record; 71 of the 75 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Scaling Up Visual and Vision-Language Representation Learning With Noisy Text Supervision

Open access
Jia, Chao, Yang, Yinfei, Xia, Ye, Chen, Yi-Ting, Parekh, Zarana, Pham, Hieu, Le, Quoc V., Sung, Yunhsuan, Li, Zhen, Duerig, Tom·2021·arXiv
DOI 10.48550/arxiv.2102.05918arXiv 2102.05918
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Pre-trained representations are becoming crucial for many NLP and perception tasks. While representation learning in NLP has transitioned to training on raw text without human annotations, visual and vision-language representations still rely heavily on curated training datasets that are expensive or require expert knowledge. For vision applications, representations are mostly learned using datasets with explicit class labels such as ImageNet or OpenImages. For vision-language, popular datasets like Conceptual Captions, MSCOCO, or CLIP all involve a non-trivial data collection (and cleaning) process. This costly curation process limits the size of datasets and hence hinders the scaling of trained models. In this paper, we leverage a noisy dataset of over one billion image alt-text pairs, obtained without expensive filtering or post-processing steps in the Conceptual Captions dataset. A simple dual-encoder architecture learns to align visual and language representations of the image and text pairs using a contrastive loss. We show that the scale of our corpus can make up for its noise and leads to state-of-the-art representations even with such a simple learning scheme. Our visual representation achieves strong performance when transferred to classification tasks such as ImageNet and VTAB. The aligned visual and language representations enables zero-shot image classification and also set new state-of-the-art results on Flickr30K and MSCOCO image-text retrieval benchmarks, even when compared with more sophisticated cross-attention models. The representations also enable cross-modality search with complex text and text + image queries.

Overview

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

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.2102.05918

Cites

71 of 71 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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?

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Show all 75 references

Research works printed but not linked: 7

  1. Elliott, D., Frank, S., Sima'an, K., and Specia, L. Multi30k: Multilingual english-german image descriptions. In Proceedings of the 5th Workshop on Vision and Language , 2016.
  2. Elliott, D., Frank, S., Barrault, L., Bougares, F., and Specia, L. Findings of the second shared task on multimodal machine translation and multilingual image description. In Proceedings of the Second Conference on Machine Translation, Volume 2: Shared Task Papers , September 2017.
  3. Foret, P., Kleiner, A., Mobahi, H., and Neyshabur, B. Sharpness-aware minimization for efficiently improving generalization. In International Conference on Learning Representations , 2021.
  4. Frome, A., Corrado, G. S., Shlens, J., Bengio, S., Dean, J., Ranzato, M. A., and Mikolov, T. Devise: A deep visualsemantic embedding model. In Proceedings of Neural Information Processing Systems , 2013.
  5. Raffel, C., Shazeer, N., Roberts, A., Lee, K., Narang, S., Matena, M., Zhou, Y., Li, W., and Liu, P. J. Exploring the limits of transfer learning with a unified text-to-text transformer. Journal of Machine Learning Research , 2020.
  6. Touvron, H., Vedaldi, A., Douze, M., and J´ egou, H. Fixing the train-test resolution discrepancy. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , 2019.
  7. Zoph, B., Ghiasi, G., Lin, T.-Y., Cui, Y., Liu, H., Cubuk, E. D., and Le, Q. V. Rethinking pre-training and selftraining. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , 2020.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Jia, C., Yang, Y., Xia, Y., Chen, Y.-T., Parekh, Z., Pham, H., Le, Q. V., Sung, Y., Li, Z., & Duerig, T.
Affiliations
Google (United States) (US)
ORCID
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2021
Pages
4904-4916
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.48550/arxiv.2102.05918
arXiv
2102.05918
OpenAlex
W3126337491
Semantic Scholar
141a5033d9994242b18bb3b217e79582f1ee9306
Cited by
1,977
References
75
Citations by year
2026: 16 · 2025: 392 · 2024: 765 · 2023: 581 · 2022: 159 · 2021: 64
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Licence
arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
Locations
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
  • International Conference on Machine Learning
Topics
  • 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
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Domain Adaptation and Few-Shot Learning
Keywords
vision-language representation learning, contrastive learning, dual-encoder architecture, visual representation learning, zero-shot image classification, image-text retrieval, data curation

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