Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
139 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
47 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
43 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
4 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
47 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Prompting Large Vision-Language Models for Compositional Reasoning (2401.11337v1)

Published 20 Jan 2024 in cs.CV and cs.AI

Abstract: Vision-LLMs such as CLIP have shown impressive capabilities in encoding texts and images into aligned embeddings, enabling the retrieval of multimodal data in a shared embedding space. However, these embedding-based models still face challenges in effectively matching images and texts with similar visio-linguistic compositionality, as evidenced by their performance on the recent Winoground dataset. In this paper, we argue that this limitation stems from two factors: the use of single vector representations for complex multimodal data, and the absence of step-by-step reasoning in these embedding-based methods. To address this issue, we make an exploratory step using a novel generative method that prompts large vision-LLMs (e.g., GPT-4) to depict images and perform compositional reasoning. Our method outperforms other embedding-based methods on the Winoground dataset, and obtains further improvement of up to 10% accuracy when enhanced with the optimal description.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (38)
  1. Flamingo: a visual language model for few-shot learning. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 35:23716–23736.
  2. Vqa: Visual question answering. In Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on computer vision, pages 2425–2433.
  3. Language models are few-shot learners. Advances in neural information processing systems, 33:1877–1901.
  4. Video chatcaptioner: Towards the enriched spatiotemporal descriptions. arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.04227.
  5. Evaluating large language models trained on code. arXiv preprint arXiv:2107.03374.
  6. Uniter: Universal image-text representation learning. In Computer Vision–ECCV 2020: 16th European Conference, Glasgow, UK, August 23–28, 2020, Proceedings, Part XXX, pages 104–120. Springer.
  7. Imagenet: A large-scale hierarchical image database. In 2009 IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 248–255. Ieee.
  8. Why is winoground hard? investigating failures in visuolinguistic compositionality. In Proceedings of the 2022 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing.
  9. Tanmay Gupta and Aniruddha Kembhavi. 2023. Visual programming: Compositional visual reasoning without training. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 14953–14962.
  10. Scaling up visual and vision-language representation learning with noisy text supervision. In International Conference on Machine Learning, pages 4904–4916. PMLR.
  11. Blip-2: Bootstrapping language-image pre-training with frozen image encoders and large language models. In International Conference on Machine Learning.
  12. Grounded language-image pre-training. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 10965–10975.
  13. Xiang Lisa Li and Percy Liang. 2021. Prefix-tuning: Optimizing continuous prompts for generation. In Proceedings of the 2021 Conference of the Association for Computational Linguistics.
  14. Microsoft coco: Common objects in context. In Computer Vision–ECCV 2014: 13th European Conference, Zurich, Switzerland, September 6-12, 2014, Proceedings, Part V 13, pages 740–755. Springer.
  15. Improved baselines with visual instruction tuning.
  16. Visual instruction tuning.
  17. Chameleon: Plug-and-play compositional reasoning with large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.09842.
  18. Mapl: Parameter-efficient adaptation of unimodal pre-trained models for vision-language few-shot prompting. In Proceedings of the 17th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics.
  19. Training language models to follow instructions with human feedback. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 35:27730–27744.
  20. Cross-modal attention congruence regularization for vision-language relation alignment. arXiv preprint arXiv:2212.10549.
  21. Flickr30k entities: Collecting region-to-phrase correspondences for richer image-to-sentence models. In Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on computer vision, pages 2641–2649.
  22. Learning transferable visual models from natural language supervision. In International Conference on Machine Learning, pages 8748–8763. PMLR.
  23. Faster r-cnn: Towards real-time object detection with region proposal networks. Advances in neural information processing systems, 28.
  24. Learning relation alignment for calibrated cross-modal retrieval. In Proceedings of the Joint Conference of the 59th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics.
  25. Hugginggpt: Solving ai tasks with chatgpt and its friends in huggingface. arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.17580.
  26. Flava: A foundational language and vision alignment model. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 15638–15650.
  27. Modular visual question answering via code generation. In Proceedings of the 2023 Conference of the Association for Computational Linguistics.
  28. Vipergpt: Visual inference via python execution for reasoning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.08128.
  29. Winoground: Probing vision and language models for visio-linguistic compositionality. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 5238–5248.
  30. Multimodal few-shot learning with frozen language models. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, volume 34, pages 200–212.
  31. Learning to ask informative sub-questions for visual question answering. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 4681–4690.
  32. Ofa: Unifying architectures, tasks, and modalities through a simple sequence-to-sequence learning framework. In International Conference on Machine Learning, pages 23318–23340. PMLR.
  33. Co-VQA : Answering by interactive sub question sequence. In Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL 2022, pages 2396–2408, Dublin, Ireland. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  34. Chain of thought prompting elicits reasoning in large language models. In Advances in neural information processing systems.
  35. Visual chatgpt: Talking, drawing and editing with visual foundation models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.04671.
  36. Mm-react: Prompting chatgpt for multimodal reasoning and action. arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.11381.
  37. Idealgpt: Iteratively decomposing vision and language reasoning via large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.14985.
  38. Minigpt-4: Enhancing vision-language understanding with advanced large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.10592.
Citations (2)
View on Semantic Scholar

Summary

  • The paper presents KeyComp, a generative approach that leverages multi-step reasoning to improve VLM compositional analysis.
  • It employs keyword detection and guided image description to enhance the interpretation of complex visual-text relationships.
  • Experimental results show a 5.1% improvement in image scoring accuracy on the Winoground dataset over embedding-based models.

Analyzing Prompting Strategies for Compositional Reasoning in Vision-LLMs

The paper "Prompting Large Vision-LLMs for Compositional Reasoning" presents a novel exploration into the limitations and capabilities of Vision-LLMs (VLMs) with respect to compositional reasoning. Specifically, the research addresses the challenges faced by embedding-based approaches in tasks requiring nuanced understanding of visual and textual data compositionality, with a focus on the Winoground dataset. The central contribution of this paper is the development of a generative approach, termed KeyComp, that exploits the potential of large vision-LLMs, like GPT-4, to overcome these challenges.

Technical Overview

KeyComp addresses two primary limitations identified in existing embedding-based models: the reliance on single vector representations for complex multimodal data and the absence of step-by-step reasoning processes. These limitations hinder the models' abilities to discern intricate relationships between objects in visual data and their textual descriptions. To mitigate this, KeyComp introduces a multi-step generative method that enhances model performance in compositional reasoning.

KeyComp's approach comprises three core stages:

  1. Keyword Detection: Keywords are extracted from the caption text to focus the vision model's attention on relevant image details, guiding the visual representation process.
  2. Keyword-guided Image Description: A VLM generates detailed descriptions of image content guided by the previously identified keywords, enabling the representation of key entities and their relations in the images.
  3. Reasoning with LLMs: The descriptions are analyzed with an LLM to perform stepwise reasoning, yielding improved selection accuracy for image-to-text and text-to-image matching tasks.

The proposed methodology leverages the advanced reasoning capabilities inherent in LLMs over weaker VLM counterparts, providing substantial gains in performance metrics when benchmarked against state-of-the-art embedding-based methods.

Empirical Results

KeyComp achieves significant improvements in image scoring on the Winoground dataset, outperforming established models like CLIP, IAIS, and CACR by notable margins. With a clear enhancement of 5.1% in image scoring accuracy, the paper highlights the effectiveness of its generative approach in handling complex examples and non-standard images. Furthermore, error analysis reveals gaps in VLMs' current spatial reasoning capabilities and illuminates potential areas of refinement, such as improving image content descriptions and better interpreting syntactic complexity.

Implications and Future Directions

The findings underscore the importance of fine-grained reasoning in VLMs, suggesting that leveraging keyword guidance and multi-step reasoning substantially elevates the quality of image descriptions and matching accuracy. From a theoretical standpoint, this work advances our understanding of multimodal representations and the mechanisms necessary for compositional reasoning.

Looking forward, enhancing the spatial reasoning abilities of VLMs emerges as a key area for future research. The development of effective prompting strategies, capable of directing models to crucial image areas suitably, and advances in handling spatial and partial object reasoning may significantly improve VLM performance. Additionally, research could explore further integration of LLMs with refined visual inputs to enrich reasoning outputs more reliably.

In conclusion, this paper contributes constructively to the field by providing a methodological framework and experimental insights into leveraging generative techniques for advancing compositional reasoning in VLMs. The strategies introduced offer a promising pathway for creating more robust and intelligent vision-language systems that can handle a broader range of tasks with higher precision.

File Document Download Save Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com PDF File Document Download Save Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Markdown