CoChat
Sign Up
PreprintCited by 190Multimodal Machine Learning ApplicationsDomain Adaptation and Few-Shot LearningAdvanced Neural Network Applications

The DOI matches its DataCite record.

Eyes Wide Shut? Exploring the Visual Shortcomings of Multimodal LLMs

Open access
Tong, Shengbang, Liu, Zhuang, Zhai, Yuexiang, Ma, Yi, LeCun, Yann, Xie, Saining·2024·arXiv
DOI 10.48550/arxiv.2401.06209arXiv 2401.06209
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Is vision good enough for language? Recent advancements in multimodal models primarily stem from the powerful reasoning abilities of large language models (LLMs). However, the visual component typically depends only on the instance-level contrastive language-image pre-training (CLIP). Our research reveals that the visual capabilities in recent multimodal LLMs (MLLMs) still exhibit systematic shortcomings. To understand the roots of these errors, we explore the gap between the visual embedding space of CLIP and vision-only self-supervised learning. We identify ''CLIP-blind pairs'' - images that CLIP perceives as similar despite their clear visual differences. With these pairs, we construct the Multimodal Visual Patterns (MMVP) benchmark. MMVP exposes areas where state-of-the-art systems, including GPT-4V, struggle with straightforward questions across nine basic visual patterns, often providing incorrect answers and hallucinated explanations. We further evaluate various CLIP-based vision-and-language models and found a notable correlation between visual patterns that challenge CLIP models and those problematic for multimodal LLMs. As an initial effort to address these issues, we propose a Mixture of Features (MoF) approach, demonstrating that integrating vision self-supervised learning features with MLLMs can significantly enhance their visual grounding capabilities. Together, our research suggests visual representation learning remains an open challenge, and accurate visual grounding is crucial for future successful multimodal systems.

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.2401.06209

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.

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?

  • Language-supervised representations such as CLIP have demonstrated inherent shortcomings in recognizing certain types of visual patterns, such as object orientation, quantity, and viewpoint.

    “Language-supervised representations ( e.g., CLIP) have demonstrated inherent shortcomings in recognizing certain types of visual patterns, such as object orientation, quantity, and viewpoint [252].”

    From Survey of Hallucination in Natural Language Generation (2023) · cites this paper as [252]

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

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 57

  1. Rohan Anil, Andrew M Dai, Orhan Firat, Melvin John- son, 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
  2. Mahmoud Assran, Quentin Duval, Ishan Misra, Piotr Bo- janowski, Pascal Vincent, Michael Rabbat, Yann LeCun, and Nicolas Ballas. Self-supervised learning from images with a joint-embedding predictive architecture. In CVPR, 2023.
  3. Sébastien Bubeck, Varun Chandrasekaran, Ronen Eldan, Jo- hannes Gehrke, Eric Horvitz, Ece Kamar, Peter Lee, Yin Tat Lee, Yuanzhi Li, Scott Lundberg, et al. Sparks of artificial general intelligence: Early experiments with gpt-4. arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.12712, 2023. · arXiv
  4. Ting Chen, Simon Kornblith, Mohammad Norouzi, and Ge- offrey Hinton. A simple framework for contrastive learning of visual representations. In ICML, 2020.
  5. Alexey Dosovitskiy, Lucas Beyer, Alexander Kolesnikov, Dirk Weissenborn, Xiaohua Zhai, Thomas Unterthiner, Mostafa Dehghani, Matthias Minderer, Georg Heigold, Syl- vain Gelly, Jakob Uszkoreit, and Neil Houlsby. An image is worth 16x16 words: Transformers for image recognition at scale. In ICML, 2021.
  6. Alex Fang, Albin Madappally Jose, Amit Jain, Ludwig Schmidt, Alexander Toshev, and Vaishaal Shankar. Data fil- tering networks. arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.17425, 2023. · arXiv
  7. 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
  8. Hila Gonen and Yoav Goldberg. Lipstick on a pig: Debiasing methods cover up systematic gender biases in word embed- dings but do not remove them. In NAACL, 2019.
  9. Yash Goyal, Tejas Khot, Douglas Summers-Stay, Dhruv Ba- tra, and Devi Parikh. Making the V in VQA matter: El- evating the role of image understanding in visual question answering. In CVPR, 2017.
  10. Jean-Bastien Grill, Florian Strub, Florent Altché, Corentin Tallec, Pierre Richemond, Elena Buchatskaya, Carl Doersch, Bernardo Avila Pires, Zhaohan Guo, Mohammad Ghesh- laghi Azar, et al. Bootstrap your own latent-a new approach to self-supervised learning. In NeurIPS, 2020.
  11. Kaiming He, Haoqi Fan, Yuxin Wu, Saining Xie, and Ross Girshick. Momentum contrast for unsupervised visual rep- resentation learning. In CVPR, 2020.
  12. Kaiming He, Xinlei Chen, Saining Xie, Yanghao Li, Piotr Dollár, and Ross Girshick. Masked autoencoders are scalable vision learners. In CVPR, 2022.
  13. Cheng-Yu Hsieh, Jieyu Zhang, Zixian Ma, Aniruddha Kem- bhavi, and Ranjay Krishna. Sugarcrepe: Fixing hack- able benchmarks for vision-language compositionality. In NeurIPS, 2023.
  14. Jennifer Hu and Roger Levy. Prompt-based methods may underestimate large language models' linguistic generaliza- tions. In EMNLP, 2023.
  15. Drew A Hudson and Christopher D Manning. GQA: A new dataset for real-world visual reasoning and compositional question answering. In CVPR, 2019.
  16. Heewoo Jun and Alex Nichol. Shap-E: Generat- ing conditional 3d implicit functions. arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.02463, 2023. · arXiv
  17. Sahar Kazemzadeh, Vicente Ordonez, Mark Matten, and Tamara Berg. Referitgame: Referring to objects in pho- tographs of natural scenes. In EMNLP, 2014.
  18. Ranjay Krishna, Yuke Zhu, Oliver Groth, Justin Johnson, Kenji Hata, Joshua Kravitz, Stephanie Chen, Yannis Kalan- tidis, Li-Jia Li, David A Shamma, et al. Visual genome: Connecting language and vision using crowdsourced dense image annotations. IJCV, 2017.
  19. Hugo Laurenc ¸on, Lucile Saulnier, Léo Tronchon, Stas Bek- man, Amanpreet Singh, Anton Lozhkov, Thomas Wang, Sid- dharth Karamcheti, Alexander M Rush, Douwe Kiela, et al. Obelisc: An open web-scale filtered dataset of interleaved image-text documents. arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.16527, 2023. · arXiv
  20. Junnan Li, Dongxu Li, Silvio Savarese, and Steven Hoi. BLIP-2: bootstrapping language-image pre-training with frozen image encoders and large language models. In ICML, 2023.
  21. Yifan Li, Yifan Du, Kun Zhou, Jinpeng Wang, Wayne Xin Zhao, and Ji-Rong Wen. Evaluating object hallucina- tion in large vision-language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.10355, 2023. · arXiv
  22. Fuxiao Liu, Tianrui Guan, Zongxia Li, Lichang Chen, Yaser Yacoob, Dinesh Manocha, and Tianyi Zhou. Hallusion- bench: You see what you think? or you think what you see? an image-context reasoning benchmark challenging for GPT-4V (ision), LLaVA-1.5, and other multi-modality mod- els. arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.14566, 2023. · arXiv
  23. 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, 2023. · arXiv
  24. Haotian Liu, Chunyuan Li, Yuheng Li, and Yong Jae Lee. Improved baselines with visual instruction tuning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.03744, 2023. · arXiv
  25. Yuan Liu, Haodong Duan, Yuanhan Zhang, Bo Li, Songyang Zhang, Wangbo Zhao, Yike Yuan, Jiaqi Wang, Conghui He, Ziwei Liu, et al. Mmbench: Is your multi-modal model an all-around player? arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.06281, 2023. · arXiv
  26. Ilya Loshchilov and Frank Hutter. Decoupled weight decay regularization. In ICLR, 2017.
  27. Junhua Mao, Jonathan Huang, Alexander Toshev, Oana Camburu, Alan L Yuille, and Kevin Murphy. Generation and comprehension of unambiguous object descriptions. In CVPR, 2016.
  28. Kenneth Marino, Mohammad Rastegari, Ali Farhadi, and Roozbeh Mottaghi. OK-VQA: A visual question answering benchmark requiring external knowledge. In CVPR, 2019.
  29. Chandler May, Alex Wang, Shikha Bordia, Samuel R Bow- man, and Rachel Rudinger. On measuring social biases in sentence encoders. In NAACL, 2019.
  30. Norman Mu, Alexander Kirillov, David Wagner, and Sain- ing Xie. Slip: Self-supervision meets language-image pre- training. In ECCV, 2022.
  31. Maxime Oquab, Timothée Darcet, Théo Moutakanni, Huy Vo, Marc Szafraniec, Vasil Khalidov, Pierre Fernandez, Daniel Haziza, Francisco Massa, Alaaeldin El-Nouby, et al. DINOv2: Learning robust visual features without supervi- sion. arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.07193, 2023. · arXiv
  32. Alec Radford, Jong Wook Kim, Chris Hallacy, Aditya Ramesh, Gabriel Goh, Sandhini Agarwal, Girish Sastry, Amanda Askell, Pamela Mishkin, Jack Clark, et al. Learn- ing transferable visual models from natural language super- vision. In ICML, 2021.
  33. Colin Raffel, Noam Shazeer, Adam Roberts, Katherine Lee, Sharan Narang, Michael Matena, Yanqi Zhou, Wei Li, and Peter J Liu. Exploring the limits of transfer learning with a unified text-to-text transformer. JMLR, 2020.
  34. Tal Ridnik, Emanuel Ben-Baruch, Asaf Noy, and Lihi Zelnik-Manor. Imagenet-21k pretraining for the masses. In NeurIPS, 2021.
  35. Robin Rombach, Andreas Blattmann, Dominik Lorenz, Patrick Esser, and Björn Ommer. High-resolution image syn- thesis with latent diffusion models. In CVPR, 2022.
  36. Olga Russakovsky, Jia Deng, Hao Su, Jonathan Krause, San- jeev Satheesh, Sean Ma, Zhiheng Huang, Andrej Karpathy, Aditya Khosla, Michael Bernstein, et al. Imagenet large scale visual recognition challenge. IJCV, 2015.
  37. Christoph Schuhmann, Romain Beaumont, Richard Vencu, Cade Gordon, Ross Wightman, Mehdi Cherti, Theo Coombes, Aarush Katta, Clayton Mullis, Mitchell Worts- man, et al. LAION-5B: An open large-scale dataset for train- ing next generation image-text models. In NeurIPS, 2022.
  38. Dustin Schwenk, Apoorv Khandelwal, Christopher Clark, Kenneth Marino, and Roozbeh Mottaghi. A-OKVQA: A benchmark for visual question answering using world knowl- edge. In ECCV, 2022.
  39. Piyush Sharma, Nan Ding, Sebastian Goodman, and Radu Soricut. Conceptual captions: A cleaned, hypernymed, im- age alt-text dataset for automatic image captioning. In ACL, 2018.
  40. Oleksii Sidorov, Ronghang Hu, Marcus Rohrbach, and Amanpreet Singh. Textcaps: a dataset for image captioning with reading comprehension. In ECCV, 2020.
  41. Amanpreet Singh, Vivek Natarajan, Meet Shah, Yu Jiang, Xinlei Chen, Dhruv Batra, Devi Parikh, and Marcus Rohrbach. Towards VQA models that can read. In CVPR, 2019.
  42. Mannat Singh, Quentin Duval, Kalyan Vasudev Alwala, Haoqi Fan, Vaibhav Aggarwal, Aaron Adcock, Armand Joulin, Piotr Dollár, Christoph Feichtenhofer, Ross Girshick, et al. The effectiveness of MAE pre-pretraining for billion- scale pretraining. In ICCV, 2023.
  43. Quan Sun, Yuxin Fang, Ledell Wu, Xinlong Wang, and Yue Cao. EVA-CLIP: Improved training techniques for clip at scale. arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.15389, 2023. · arXiv
  44. Tony Sun, Andrew Gaut, Shirlyn Tang, Yuxin Huang, Mai ElSherief, Jieyu Zhao, Diba Mirza, Elizabeth Belding, Kai- Wei Chang, and William Yang Wang. Mitigating gender bias in natural language processing: Literature review. In ACL, 2019.
  45. Tristan Thrush, Ryan Jiang, Max Bartolo, Amanpreet Singh, Adina Williams, Douwe Kiela, and Candace Ross. Winoground: Probing vision and language models for visio- linguistic compositionality. In CVPR, 2022.
  46. Shengbang Tong, Erik Jones, and Jacob Steinhardt. Mass- producing failures of multimodal systems with language models. In NeurIPS, 2023.
  47. Hugo Touvron, Thibaut Lavril, Gautier Izacard, Xavier Martinet, Marie-Anne Lachaux, Timothée Lacroix, Baptiste Rozière, Naman Goyal, Eric Hambro, Faisal Azhar, et al. LLaMA: Open and efficient foundation language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.13971, 2023. · arXiv
  48. Michael Tschannen, Manoj Kumar, Andreas Steiner, Xiao- hua Zhai, Neil Houlsby, and Lucas Beyer. Image captioners are scalable vision learners too. NeurIPS, 2023.
  49. Hu Xu, Saining Xie, Xiaoqing Ellen Tan, Po-Yao Huang, Russell Howes, Vasu Sharma, Shang-Wen Li, Gargi Ghosh, Luke Zettlemoyer, and Christoph Feichtenhofer. Demystify- ing CLIP data. arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.16671, 2023. · arXiv
  50. Zhengyuan Yang, Linjie Li, Kevin Lin, Jianfeng Wang, Chung-Ching Lin, Zicheng Liu, and Lijuan Wang. The Dawn of LMMs: Preliminary Explorations with GPT-4V (ision). arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.17421, 2023. · arXiv
  51. Weihao Yu, Zhengyuan Yang, Linjie Li, Jianfeng Wang, Kevin Lin, Zicheng Liu, Xinchao Wang, and Lijuan Wang. MM-Vet: Evaluating large multimodal models for integrated capabilities. arXiv preprint arXiv:2308.02490, 2023. · arXiv
  52. Mert Yuksekgonul, Federico Bianchi, Pratyusha Kalluri, Dan Jurafsky, and James Zou. When and why vision- language models behave like bags-of-words, and what to do about it? In ICLR, 2022.
  53. Xiaohua Zhai, Basil Mustafa, Alexander Kolesnikov, and Lucas Beyer. Sigmoid loss for language image pre-training. In ICCV, 2023.
  54. Yuexiang Zhai, Shengbang Tong, Xiao Li, Mu Cai, Qing Qu, Yong Jae Lee, and Yi Ma. Investigating the catastrophic for- getting in multimodal large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.10313, 2023. · arXiv
  55. Renrui Zhang, Jiaming Han, Aojun Zhou, Xiangfei Hu, Shilin Yan, Pan Lu, Hongsheng Li, Peng Gao, and Yu Qiao. Llama-adapter: Efficient fine-tuning of language models with zero-init attention. arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.16199, 2023. · arXiv
  56. Jinghao Zhou, Chen Wei, Huiyu Wang, Wei Shen, Cihang Xie, Alan Yuille, and Tao Kong. iBOT: Image BERT pre- training with online tokenizer. In ICLR, 2021.
  57. Deyao Zhu, Jun Chen, Xiaoqian Shen, Xiang Li, and Mo- hamed Elhoseiny. MiniGPT-4: Enhancing vision-language understanding with advanced large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.10592, 2023. · arXiv

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Tong, S., Liu, Z., Zhai, Y., Ma, Y., LeCun, Y., & Xie, S.
Affiliations
  • New York University (US)
  • University of California, Berkeley (US)
ORCID
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2024
Pages
9568-9578
ISSN
1063-6919 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.48550/arxiv.2401.06209
arXiv
2401.06209
OpenAlex
W4402754023
Cited by
190
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 77 · 2025: 80 · 2024: 33
FWCI
38.92
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings - IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings (publishedVersion)
  • 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 › Artificial Intelligence › Domain Adaptation and Few-Shot Learning
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Neural Network Applications
Keywords
multimodal large language models, CLIP, visual grounding, GPT-4V, hallucinations, visual representation learning, 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