The DOI matches its DataCite record.
Exploring Effective Factors for Improving Visual In-Context Learning
Abstract
The In-Context Learning (ICL) is to understand a new task via a few demonstrations (aka. prompt) and predict new inputs without tuning the models. While it has been widely studied in NLP, it is still a relatively new area of research in computer vision. To reveal the factors influencing the performance of visual in-context learning, this paper shows that prompt selection and prompt fusion are two major factors that have a direct impact on the inference performance of visual context learning. Prompt selection is the process of identifying the most appropriate prompt or example to help the model understand new tasks. This is important because providing the model with relevant prompts can help it learn more effectively and efficiently. Prompt fusion involves combining knowledge from different positions within the large-scale visual model. By doing this, the model can leverage the diverse knowledge stored in different parts of the model to improve its performance on new tasks. Based these findings, we propose a simple framework prompt-SelF for visual in-context learning. Specifically, we first use the pixel-level retrieval method to select a suitable prompt, and then use different prompt fusion methods to activate all the knowledge stored in the large-scale model, and finally ensemble the prediction results obtained from different prompt fusion methods to obtain the final prediction results. And we conduct extensive experiments on single-object segmentation and detection tasks to demonstrate the effectiveness of prompt-SelF. Remarkably, the prompt-SelF has outperformed OSLSM based meta-learning in 1-shot segmentation for the first time. This indicated the great potential of visual in-context learning. The source code and models will be available at https://github.com/syp2ysy/prompt-SelF.
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?
In the citing paper
“Similar to ICL in NLP, the effectiveness of visual in-context learning greatly depends on the choice of demonstration images, as shown in research by (Zhang et al., 2023a) and (Sun et al., 2023).”
From A Survey on In-context Learning (2024) · cites this paper as Sun et al., 2023
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
Cited by
A Survey on In-context Learning
Dong, Q., Li, L., Dai, D., Zheng, C., Ma, J., Li, R., Xia, H., Xu, J., Wu, Z., Chang, B., et al. (2024) · Proceedings of the 2024 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing · doi:10.18653/v1/2024.emnlp-main.64 · Cited by 649
Metadata
- Authors
- Sun, Y., Chen, Q., Li, X., Wang, J., Wang, J., & Li, Z.
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2023
- arXiv
- 2304.04748
- References
- 0
- Type
- Preprint
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Exploring Effective Factors for Improving Visual In-Context Learning. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.48550/arxiv.2304.04748
- The paper
- Sun, Y., Chen, Q., Li, X., Wang, J., Wang, J., & Li, Z. (2023). Exploring Effective Factors for Improving Visual In-Context Learning. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arxiv.2304.04748
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.