The DOI matches its DataCite record; 69 of the 69 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Language Is Not All You Need: Aligning Perception with Language Models
Open accessAbstract
A big convergence of language, multimodal perception, action, and world modeling is a key step toward artificial general intelligence. In this work, we introduce Kosmos-1, a Multimodal Large Language Model (MLLM) that can perceive general modalities, learn in context (i.e., few-shot), and follow instructions (i.e., zero-shot). Specifically, we train Kosmos-1 from scratch on web-scale multimodal corpora, including arbitrarily interleaved text and images, image-caption pairs, and text data. We evaluate various settings, including zero-shot, few-shot, and multimodal chain-of-thought prompting, on a wide range of tasks without any gradient updates or finetuning. Experimental results show that Kosmos-1 achieves impressive performance on (i) language understanding, generation, and even OCR-free NLP (directly fed with document images), (ii) perception-language tasks, including multimodal dialogue, image captioning, visual question answering, and (iii) vision tasks, such as image recognition with descriptions (specifying classification via text instructions). We also show that MLLMs can benefit from cross-modal transfer, i.e., transfer knowledge from language to multimodal, and from multimodal to language. In addition, we introduce a dataset of Raven IQ test, which diagnoses the nonverbal reasoning capability of MLLMs.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Furthermore, developing more efficient transformer architectures tailored for multimodal data, such as Kosmos-1 [162], Muse [163], and PixArt-α [164], presents a viable solution.”
From Multimodal Large Language Models in Health Care: Applications, Challenges, and Future Outlook. (2024) · cites this paper as [162]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Huang et al. [77] introduced KOSMOS-1, which is capable of understanding general patterns, following instructions, and learning based on context.”
From A Survey on Evaluation of Large Language Models (2024) · cites this paper as [77]
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
ImageNet: A large-scale hierarchical image database
Deng, J., Dong, W., Socher, R., Li, L.-J., Li, K., & Fei-Fei, L. (2009) · 2009 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition · doi:10.1109/cvpr.2009.5206848 · Cited by 65,333 · cited 3×
“6 Zero-Shot Image Classification We report the zero-shot image classification performance on ImageNet [DDS09].”
BackgroundMethodMicrosoft COCO: Common Objects in Context
Lin, T.-Y., Maire, M., Belongie, S., Hays, J., Perona, P., Ramanan, D., Dollár, P., & Zitnick, C. L. (2014) · Lecture Notes in Computer Science · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-10602-1_48 · Cited by 45,460 · cited 2×
“Image Captioning Table 2a shows the captioning performance on COCO [39] Karpathy test split and Flickr30k [40] test set.”
BackgroundLanguage Models are Few-Shot Learners
Brown, T. B., Mann, B., Ryder, N., Subbiah, M., Kaplan, J., Dhariwal, P., Neelakantan, A., Shyam, P., Sastry, G., Askell, A., et al. (2020) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2005.14165 · Cited by 23,372
RoBERTa: A Robustly Optimized BERT Pretraining Approach
Liu, Y., Ott, M., Goyal, N., Du, J., Joshi, M., Chen, D., Levy, O., Lewis, M., Zettlemoyer, L., & Stoyanov, V. (2019) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1907.11692 · Cited by 16,515 · cited 1×
“We preprocess the data in the “full-sentence” format [LOG19], which packs each input sequence with full sentences that are sampled continuously from one or more documents.”
MethodLearning Transferable Visual Models From Natural Language Supervision
Radford, A., Kim, J. W., Hallacy, C., Ramesh, A., Goh, G., Agarwal, S., Sastry, G., Askell, A., Mishkin, P., Clark, J., et al. (2021) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2103.00020 · Cited by 15,293 · cited 3×
“In recent years, vision-language learning and representation models has garnered significant attention [2, 3, 4, 34, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54].”
BackgroundMethodRecursive Deep Models for Semantic Compositionality Over a Sentiment Treebank
Socher, R., Perelygin, A., Wu, J., Chuang, J., Manning, C. D., Ng, A., & Potts, C. (2013) · Proceedings of the 2013 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing · doi:10.18653/v1/d13-1170 · Cited by 6,878
CIDEr: Consensus-based image description evaluation
Vedantam, R., Zitnick, C. L., & Parikh, D. (2015) · 2015 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) · doi:10.1109/cvpr.2015.7299087 · Cited by 4,845 · cited 3×
“Specifically, our model achieves a CIDEr score of 67.1 on the Flickr30k dataset, compared to 60.6 and 61.5 for the Flamingo-3B and Flamingo-9B models, respectively.”
MethodInfluentialChain-Of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Models
Wei, J., Wang, X., Schuurmans, D., Bosma, M., Ichter, B., Xia, F., Chi, E., Le, Q. V., & Zhou, D. (2022) · Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 35 · doi:10.52202/068431-1800 · Cited by 4,505 · cited 2×
“LLMs also serve as basic reasoners [10], which is complementary to perception modules on complex tasks.”
BackgroundKudo, T., & Richardson, J. (2018) · Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing · doi:10.18653/v1/d18-2012 · Cited by 4,454 · cited 2×
“We adopt a learning rate warm-up and decay schedule, and use SentencePiece for tokenization.”
MethodChain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Models
Wei, J., Wang, X., Schuurmans, D., Bosma, M., Ichter, B., Xia, F., Chi, E., Le, Q., & Zhou, D. (2022) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2201.11903 · Cited by 4,263
Research works printed but not linked: 5
- Elia Bruni, Gemma Boleda, Marco Baroni, and Nam Khanh Tran. Distributional semantics in technicolor. In ACL, 2012.
- Patricia A Carpenter, Marcel A Just, and Peter Shell. What one intelligence test measures: a theoretical account of the processing in the raven progressive matrices test. Psychological review, 97(3):404, 1990.
- Hector Levesque, Ernest Davis, and Leora Morgenstern. The winograd schema chal- lenge. In Thirteenth International Conference on the Principles of Knowledge Repre- sentation and Reasoning, 2012.
- Melissa Roemmele, Cosmin Adrian Bejan, and Andrew S. Gordon. Choice of plau- sible alternatives: An evaluation of commonsense causal reasoning. In AAAI Spring Symposium, 2011.
- Keisuke Sakaguchi, Ronan Le Bras, Chandra Bhagavatula, and Yejin Choi. WinoGrande: An adversarial winograd schema challenge at scale. In AAAI, pages 8732-8740, 2020.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
A Survey on Evaluation of Large Language Models
Chang, Y., Wang, X., Wang, J., Wu, Y., Yang, L., Zhu, K., Chen, H., Yi, X., Wang, C., Wang, Y., et al. (2024) · ACM Transactions on Intelligent Systems and Technology · doi:10.1145/3641289 · Cited by 4,254
Huang, L., Yu, W., Ma, W., Zhong, W., Feng, Z., Wang, H., Chen, Q., Peng, W., Feng, X., Qin, B., et al. (2025) · ACM Transactions on Information Systems · doi:10.1145/3703155 · Cited by 4,688
The rise and potential of large language model based agents: a survey
Xi, Z., Chen, W., Guo, X., He, W., Ding, Y., Hong, B., Zhang, M., Wang, J., Jin, S., Zhou, E., et al. (2025) · Science China Information Sciences · doi:10.1007/s11432-024-4222-0 · Cited by 970
“The second approach to endowing an LLM-based agent with visual understanding capabilities is modality fusion, where a visual encoder is integrated with an LLM at the embedding level [209,210].”
Self-citationVideo-LLaMA: An Instruction-tuned Audio-Visual Language Model for Video Understanding
Zhang, H., Li, X. S., & Bing, L. (2023) · Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing: System Demonstrations (EMNLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/2023.emnlp-demo.49 · Cited by 744
A Survey on Large Language Models: Applications, Challenges, Limitations, and Practical UsagePreprint
Hadi, M. U., Al-Tashi, Q., Qureshi, R., Shah, A., Muneer, A., Irfan, M., Zafar, A., Shaikh, M. B., Akhtar, N., Hassan, S. Z., et al. (2023) · doi:10.36227/techrxiv.23589741.v1 · Cited by 475
Metadata
- Authors
- Huang, S., Dong, L., Wang, W., Hao, Y., Singhal, S., Ma, S., Lv, T., Cui, L., Mohammed, O. K., Patra, B., Liu, Q., Aggarwal, K., Chi, Z., Bjorck, J., Chaudhary, V., Som, S., Song, X., & Wei, F.
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2023
- Pages
- 72096-72109
- ISSN
- 1049-5258 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 2302.14045
- OpenAlex
- W7133185515
- Cited by
- 235
- References
- 65
- Citations by year
- 2026: 37 · 2025: 47 · 2024: 95 · 2023: 55
- FWCI
- 86.06
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- neural information processing systems (publishedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Categorization, perception, and language
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Multimodal Machine Learning Applications
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Natural Language Processing Techniques
- Keywords
- language models, perception, multimodal alignment, vision-language models
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