Foundations and Trends in Multimodal Machine Learning: Principles, Challenges, and Open Questions
Open accessAbstract
Multimodal machine learning is a vibrant multi-disciplinary research field that aims to design computer agents with intelligent capabilities such as understanding, reasoning, and learning through integrating multiple communicative modalities, including linguistic, acoustic, visual, tactile, and physiological messages. With the recent interest in video understanding, embodied autonomous agents, text-to-image generation, and multisensor fusion in application domains such as healthcare and robotics, multimodal machine learning has brought unique computational and theoretical challenges to the machine learning community given the heterogeneity of data sources and the interconnections often found between modalities. However, the breadth of progress in multimodal research has made it difficult to identify the common themes and open questions in the field. By synthesizing a broad range of application domains and theoretical frameworks from both historical and recent perspectives, this paper is designed to provide an overview of the computational and theoretical foundations of multimodal machine learning. We start by defining three key principles of modality heterogeneity, connections, and interactions that have driven subsequent innovations, and propose a taxonomy of six core technical challenges: representation, alignment, reasoning, generation, transference, and quantification covering historical and recent trends. Recent technical achievements will be presented through the lens of this taxonomy, allowing researchers to understand the similarities and differences across new approaches. We end by motivating several open problems for future research as identified by our taxonomy.
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?
Wearable sensors such as accelerometers, gyroscopes, and magnetometers capture detailed information about a person's movements and posture, whereas cameras capture visual information about person and surroundings.
“For example, wearable sensors such as accelerometers, gyroscopes, and magnetometers capture detailed information about a person's movements and posture, whereas cameras capture visual information about the person and their surroundings [114,116,164,165].”
From A Survey of Video Surveillance Systems in Smart City (2023) · cites this paper as [165]
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
Cited by 38
- Authors
- Liang, P. P., Zadeh, A., & Morency, L.-P.
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2022
- ISSN
- 2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 2209.03430
- OpenAlex
- W4295106955
- Cited by
- 38
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2025: 9 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 1
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation (1750439, 1722822)
- BMW of North America
- Carnegie Mellon University
- National Institutes of Health
- National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH096951, U01MH116925, R01MH125740)
- Center for Machine Learning and Health, School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Multimodal Machine Learning Applications
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Multisensory perception and integration
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Domain Adaptation and Few-Shot Learning
- Keywords
- multimodal learning, modality heterogeneity, modality interaction, representation learning, cross-modal alignment, multimodal reasoning, text-to-image generation, video understanding, sensor fusion, transfer learning, open problems
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