CoChat
Sign Up
PreprintCited by 4Multimodal Machine Learning ApplicationsAdvanced Neural Network ApplicationsGenerative Adversarial Networks and Image Synthesis

HallE-Control: Controlling Object Hallucination in Large Multimodal Models

Open access
Zhai, Bohan, Yang, Shijia, Xu, Chenfeng, Shen, Sheng, Keutzer, Kurt, Li, Chunyuan, Li, Manling·2023·arXiv
DOI 10.48550/arxiv.2310.01779arXiv 2310.01779
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Current Large Multimodal Models (LMMs) achieve remarkable progress, yet there remains significant uncertainty regarding their ability to accurately apprehend visual details, that is, in performing detailed captioning. To address this, we introduce $\textit{CCEval}$, a GPT-4 assisted evaluation method for detailed captioning. Interestingly, while LMMs demonstrate minimal object existence hallucination in existing VQA benchmarks, our proposed evaluation reveals continued susceptibility to such hallucinations. In this paper, we make the first attempt to investigate such hallucination from different aspects, including image resolution, the language decoder size, and instruction data amount, quality, granularity. Our findings underscore the unwarranted inference when the language description includes details at a finer object granularity than what the vision module can ground or verify, thus inducing hallucination. To control such hallucinations, we further attribute the reliability of captioning to contextual knowledge (involving only contextually grounded objects) and parametric knowledge (containing inferred objects by the model). Thus, we introduce $\textit{HallE-Control}$, a controllable LMM in terms of $\textbf{Hall}$ucination in object $\textbf{E}$xistence. HallE-Control can condition the captioning to shift between (i) exclusively depicting contextual knowledge for grounded objects and (ii) blending it with parametric knowledge to imagine inferred objects. Our method reduces hallucination by 44% compared to LLaVA$_{7B}$ and maintains the object coverage.

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.2310.01779

Cites

0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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?

  • Recent work for VLMs has explored techniques to repair captioning errors prior to returning them during the generation process or post-hoc verification, but these techniques can induce further errors during correction, rather than providing a higher-precision output that only includes details that are likely correct.

    “While recent work for VLMs has explored techniques to repair captioning errors prior to returning them during the generation process (e.g., controlling what objects are mentioned [144]; strategically adjusting model weights [78, 108, 136, 141] or fi ne-tuning [22, 146]; sampling multiple patches [29]; guided decoding [150]; backtracking when uncertain [40, 131]) or post-hoc verification [139, 155]”

    From "It's trained by non-disabled people": Evaluating How Image Quality Affects Product Captioning with Vision-Language Models (2026) · cites this paper as [144]

Self-check

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

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

Cites

The publisher hasn’t deposited this paper’s reference list.

Research works printed but not linked: 47

  1. Jean-Baptiste Alayrac, Jeff Donahue, Pauline Luc, Antoine Miech, Iain Barr, Yana Hasson, Karel Lenc, Arthur Mensch, Katherine Millican, Malcolm Reynolds, et al. Flamingo: a visual language model for few-shot learning. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems.
  2. Rohan Anil, Andrew M Dai, Orhan Firat, Melvin Johnson, Dmitry Lepikhin, Alexandre Passos, Siamak Shakeri, Emanuel Taropa, Paige Bailey, Zhifeng Chen, et al. Palm 2 technical report. arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.10403, 2023. · arXiv
  3. Stanislaw Antol, Aishwarya Agrawal, Jiasen Lu, Margaret Mitchell, Dhruv Batra, C. Lawrence Zitnick, and Devi Parikh. VQA: Visual Question Answering. In International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV), 2015.
  4. Anas Awadalla, Irena Gao, Josh Gardner, Jack Hessel, Yusuf Hanafy, Wanrong Zhu, Kalyani Marathe, Yonatan Bitton, Samir Gadre, Shiori Sagawa, et al. Openflamingo: An open- source framework for training large autoregressive vision-language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2308.01390, 2023. · arXiv
  5. Jinze Bai, Shuai Bai, Shusheng Yang, Shijie Wang, Sinan Tan, Peng Wang, Junyang Lin, Chang Zhou, and Jingren Zhou. Qwen-vl: A frontier large vision-language model with versatile abilities. arXiv preprint arXiv:2308.12966, 2023. · arXiv
  6. Keqin Chen, Zhao Zhang, Weili Zeng, Richong Zhang, Feng Zhu, and Rui Zhao. Shikra: Unleashing multimodal llm's referential dialogue magic. arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.15195, 2023. · arXiv
  7. Hyung Won Chung, Le Hou, Shayne Longpre, Barret Zoph, Yi Tay, William Fedus, Eric Li, Xuezhi Wang, Mostafa Dehghani, Siddhartha Brahma, et al. Scaling instruction-finetuned language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2210.11416, 2022. · arXiv
  8. Danny Driess, Fei Xia, Mehdi SM Sajjadi, Corey Lynch, Aakanksha Chowdhery, Brian Ichter, Ayzaan Wahid, Jonathan Tompson, Quan Vuong, Tianhe Yu, et al. Palm-e: An embodied multimodal language model. arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.03378, 2023. · arXiv
  9. Nouha Dziri, Ehsan Kamalloo, Sivan Milton, Osmar Zaiane, Mo Yu, Edoardo M Ponti, and Siva Reddy. FaithDial: A Faithful Benchmark for Information-Seeking Dialogue. Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics, 10:1473-1490, 12 2022. doi: 10.1162/tacl a 00529. · DOI
  10. Chaoyou Fu, Peixian Chen, Yunhang Shen, Yulei Qin, Mengdan Zhang, Xu Lin, Zhenyu Qiu, Wei Lin, Jinrui Yang, Xiawu Zheng, et al. Mme: A comprehensive evaluation benchmark for multimodal large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.13394, 2023. · arXiv
  11. Yash Goyal, Tejas Khot, Douglas Summers-Stay, Dhruv Batra, and Devi Parikh. Making the V in VQA matter: Elevating the role of image understanding in Visual Question Answering. In Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 2017.
  12. Danna Gurari, Qing Li, Abigale J Stangl, Anhong Guo, Chi Lin, Kristen Grauman, Jiebo Luo, and Jeffrey P Bigham. Vizwiz grand challenge: Answering visual questions from blind people. CVPR, 2018.
  13. Chi Han, Jialiang Xu, Manling Li, Yi Fung, Chenkai Sun, Nan Jiang, Tarek Abdelzaher, and Heng Ji. Lm-switch: Lightweight language model conditioning in word embedding space. arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.12798, 2023. · arXiv
  14. Ziniu Hu, Ahmet Iscen, Chen Sun, Kai-Wei Chang, Yizhou Sun, David A Ross, Cordelia Schmid, and Alireza Fathi. Avis: Autonomous visual information seeking with large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.08129, 2023. · arXiv
  15. Wenlong Huang, Chen Wang, Ruohan Zhang, Yunzhu Li, Jiajun Wu, and Li Fei-Fei. Vox- poser: Composable 3d value maps for robotic manipulation with language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.05973, 2023. · arXiv
  16. Drew A Hudson and Christopher D Manning. Gqa: A new dataset for real-world visual reasoning and compositional question answering. Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 2019.
  17. Ziwei Ji, Nayeon Lee, Rita Frieske, Tiezheng Yu, Dan Su, Yan Xu, Etsuko Ishii, Ye Jin Bang, Andrea Madotto, and Pascale Fung. Survey of hallucination in natural language generation. ACM Computing Surveys, 55(12):1-38, 2023b.
  18. Zdeněk Kasner and Ondřej Dušek. Neural pipeline for zero-shot data-to-text generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2203.16279, 2022. · arXiv
  19. Ranjay Krishna, Yuke Zhu, Oliver Groth, Justin Johnson, Kenji Hata, Joshua Kravitz, Stephanie Chen, Yannis Kalantidis, Li-Jia Li, David A Shamma, et al. Visual genome: Con- necting language and vision using crowdsourced dense image annotations. International journal of computer vision, 123:32-73, 2017.
  20. Katherine Lee, Orhan Firat, Ashish Agarwal, Clara Fannjiang, and David Sussillo. Halluci- nations in neural machine translation, 2019. URL https://openreview.net/forum?id= SkxJ-309FQ.
  21. Nayeon Lee, Wei Ping, Peng Xu, Mostofa Patwary, Pascale N Fung, Mohammad Shoeybi, and Bryan Catanzaro. Factuality enhanced language models for open-ended text genera- tion. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 35:34586-34599, 2022.
  22. Bo Li, Yuanhan Zhang, Liangyu Chen, Jinghao Wang, Fanyi Pu, Jingkang Yang, Chunyuan Li, and Ziwei Liu. Mimic-it: Multi-modal in-context instruction tuning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.05425, 2023a. · arXiv
  23. Bo Li, Yuanhan Zhang, Liangyu Chen, Jinghao Wang, Jingkang Yang, and Ziwei Liu. Otter: A multi-modal model with in-context instruction tuning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.03726, 2023b. · arXiv
  24. Junnan Li, Dongxu Li, Silvio Savarese, and Steven Hoi. Blip-2: Bootstrapping language- image pre-training with frozen image encoders and large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2301.12597, 2023d. · arXiv
  25. Yifan Li, Yifan Du, Kun Zhou, Jinpeng Wang, Wayne Xin Zhao, and Ji-Rong Wen. Evaluating object hallucination in large vision-language models. 2023e. URL https://arxiv.org/ pdf/2305.10355.
  26. Chin-Yew Lin. ROUGE: A package for automatic evaluation of summaries. In Text Summa- rization Branches Out, pp. 74-81, Barcelona, Spain, July 2004. Association for Computa- tional Linguistics. URL https://aclanthology.org/W04-1013.
  27. Stephanie Lin, Jacob Hilton, and Owain Evans. Truthfulqa: Measuring how models mimic human falsehoods. arXiv preprint arXiv:2109.07958, 2021. · arXiv
  28. Tsung-Yi Lin, Michael Maire, Serge Belongie, James Hays, Pietro Perona, Deva Ramanan, Piotr Dollár, and C Lawrence Zitnick. Microsoft coco: Common objects in context. In Computer Vision-ECCV 2014: 13th European Conference, Zurich, Switzerland, September 6-12, 2014, Proceedings, Part V 13, pp. 740-755. Springer, 2014.
  29. Fuxiao Liu, Kevin Lin, Linjie Li, Jianfeng Wang, Yaser Yacoob, and Lijuan Wang. Aligning large multi-modal model with robust instruction tuning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.14565, 2023a. · arXiv
  30. Haotian Liu, Chunyuan Li, Yuheng Li, and Yong Jae Lee. Improved baselines with visual instruction tuning, 2023b. Haotian Liu, Chunyuan Li, Qingyang Wu, and Yong Jae Lee. Visual instruction tuning, 2023c. Haotian Liu, Chunyuan Li, Qingyang Wu, and Yong Jae Lee. Visual instruction tuning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.08485, 2023d. · arXiv
  31. Yuan Liu, Haodong Duan, Yuanhan Zhang, Bo Li, Songyang Zhnag, Wangbo Zhao, Yike Yuan, Jiaqi Wang, Conghui He, Ziwei Liu, Kai Chen, and Dahua Lin. Mmbench: Is your multi-modal model an all-around player? arXiv:2307.06281, 2023e. · arXiv
  32. Pan Lu, Swaroop Mishra, Tony Xia, Liang Qiu, Kai-Wei Chang, Song-Chun Zhu, Oyvind Tafjord, Peter Clark, and Ashwin Kalyan. Learn to explain: Multimodal reasoning via thought chains for science question answering. In The 36th Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS), 2022.
  33. Haley MacLeod, Cynthia L Bennett, Meredith Ringel Morris, and Edward Cutrell. Under- standing blind people's experiences with computer-generated captions of social media images. In proceedings of the 2017 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems, pp. 5988-5999, 2017.
  34. Kenneth Marino, Mohammad Rastegari, Ali Farhadi, and Roozbeh Mottaghi. Ok-vqa: A visual question answering benchmark requiring external knowledge. In Proceedings of the IEEE/cvf conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pp. 3195-3204, 2019.
  35. OpenAI. OpenAI: Introducing ChatGPT, 2022. URL https://openai.com/blog/chatgpt. OpenAI. Gpt-4 technical report. ArXiv, abs/2303.08774, 2023. · arXiv
  36. Vicente Ordonez, Girish Kulkarni, and Tamara L. Berg. Im2text: Describing images using 1 million captioned photographs. In Neural Information Processing Systems (NIPS), 2011.
  37. Zhiliang Peng, Wenhui Wang, Li Dong, Yaru Hao, Shaohan Huang, Shuming Ma, and Furu Wei. Kosmos-2: Grounding multimodal large language models to the world. arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.14824, 2023. · arXiv
  38. Anna Rohrbach, Lisa Anne Hendricks, Kaylee Burns, Trevor Darrell, and Kate Saenko. Ob- ject hallucination in image captioning. In Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP), 2018.
  39. Teven Le Scao, Angela Fan, Christopher Akiki, Ellie Pavlick, Suzana Ilić, Daniel Hesslow, Ro- man Castagné, Alexandra Sasha Luccioni, Franc ¸ois Yvon, Matthias Gallé, et al. Bloom: A 176b-parameter open-access multilingual language model. arXiv preprint arXiv:2211.05100, 2022. · arXiv
  40. Christoph Schuhmann, Richard Vencu, Romain Beaumont, Robert Kaczmarczyk, Clayton Mullis, Aarush Katta, Theo Coombes, Jenia Jitsev, and Aran Komatsuzaki. Laion-400m: Open dataset of clip-filtered 400 million image-text pairs. arXiv preprint arXiv:2111.02114, 2021. · arXiv
  41. Weijia Shi, Sewon Min, Michihiro Yasunaga, Minjoon Seo, Rich James, Mike Lewis, Luke Zettlemoyer, and Wen-tau Yih. Replug: Retrieval-augmented black-box language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2301.12652, 2023. · arXiv
  42. Hugo Touvron, Louis Martin, Kevin Stone, Peter Albert, Amjad Almahairi, Yasmine Babaei, Nikolay Bashlykov, Soumya Batra, Prajjwal Bhargava, Shruti Bhosale, et al. Llama 2: Open foundation and fine-tuned chat models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.09288, 2023b. · arXiv
  43. Qinghao Ye, Haiyang Xu, Guohai Xu, Jiabo Ye, Ming Yan, Yiyang Zhou, Junyang Wang, Anwen Hu, Pengcheng Shi, Yaya Shi, et al. mplug-owl: Modularization empowers large language models with multimodality. arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.14178, 2023. · arXiv
  44. Youcai Zhang, Xinyu Huang, Jinyu Ma, Zhaoyang Li, Zhaochuan Luo, Yanchun Xie, Yuzhuo Qin, Tong Luo, Yaqian Li, Shilong Liu, et al. Recognize anything: A strong image tagging model. arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.03514, 2023b. · arXiv
  45. Bo Zhao, Boya Wu, and Tiejun Huang. Svit: Scaling up visual instruction tuning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.04087, 2023a. · arXiv
  46. Chunting Zhou, Jiatao Gu, Mona T. Diab, Paco Guzmán, Luke Zettlemoyer, and Marjan Ghazvininejad. Detecting hallucinated content in conditional neural sequence genera- tion. ArXiv, abs/2011.02593, 2020. URL https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID: 226254579. · arXiv
  47. Deyao Zhu, Jun Chen, Xiaoqian Shen, Xiang Li, and Mohamed Elhoseiny. Minigpt-4: Enhancing vision-language understanding with advanced large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.10592, 2023. · arXiv

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Zhai, B., Yang, S., Xu, C., Shen, S., Keutzer, K., Li, C., & Li, M.
Affiliations
  • University of California, Berkeley (US)
  • University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign (US)
ORCID
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2023
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.48550/arxiv.2310.01779
arXiv
2310.01779
OpenAlex
W4387356034
Cited by
2
References
0
Citations by year
2025: 2
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Multimodal Machine Learning Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Neural Network Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Generative Adversarial Networks and Image Synthesis
Keywords
object hallucination, large multimodal models, hallucination mitigation, image resolution, parametric knowledge, LLaVA

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