arXiv:2610.01180v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Despite the strong performance of Vision-Language Models (VLMs) on a wide range of visual question answering (VQA) tasks, these models consistently str...
By Yuliang Cai, Mohammad Rostami, Jesse Thomason
arXiv:2609.24564v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: CLIP, a foundational vision-language model, has emerged as a powerful tool for open-vocabulary semantic segmentation. While freezing CLIP's text encode...
By Zelin Peng, Zhengqin Xu, Changsong Wen, Yu Huang, Yaoming Wang, Xiaokang Yang, Wei Shen
arXiv:2608.29313v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: CLIP-like vision-language models (VLMs) trained with contrastive objectives learn strong global image-text representations, but their Euclidean embed...
By Matin Mahmood, Antonio Rueda-Toicen, Mohamed ElBassat, Seifeldin Elkerdany, Weixing Wang, Gerard de Melo
arXiv:2607. 23271v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Contrastive vision-language models such as CLIP map semantically opposite phrases (e.
By Chen-Yi Lu, Yueh-Shao Chen, Somali Chaterji
arXiv:2511. 16527v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Contrastive vision-language models continue to be the dominant approach for image-text retrieval.
By Kwun Ho Ngan, Saman Sadeghi Afgeh, Joe Townsend, Artur d'Avila Garcez
The paper introduces AURORA, a hyperbolic vision‑language framework that separates angular alignment from radial ordering. Angular alignment captures semantic similarity while a novel Radial‑Angular Order Cone (RAOC) models hierarchical entailment based on parent‑child radial gaps. The approach includes norm regularization to prevent radial degeneration and is evaluated on large image‑text datasets, outperforming both Euclidean and hyperbolic baselines in zero‑shot classification, retrieval, hierarchical reasoning, and compositional understanding.
By Mingyang Gao, Yuwei Wu, Shiyu Luo, Wei Wu, Xiaomeng Fan, Qihao Lv, Haoyu Zhang, Rui Gao, Bingzhen Liu, Zhi Gao, Che Sun
DEPICT is a new training‑free metric for evaluating text‑to‑image alignment. It replaces fixed reference answers with an agreement rule that compares image‑based and caption‑only responses, weighting questions by how decisively the caption determines them. By merging this agreement score with a holistic score, DEPICT improves negation accuracy dramatically and outperforms existing training‑free metrics while matching or exceeding fine‑tuned evaluators on several benchmarks.
By Vasco Ramos, Sandra Godinho Silva, Joao Magalhaes, Ricardo Rei, Pedro Henrique Martins
arXiv:2603. 22042v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: While Vision-Language Models (VLMs) have achieved remarkable performance, their Euclidean embeddings remain limited in capturing hierarchical relationships such as part-to-whole or parent-child structures, and often face challenges in multi-object compositional scenarios.
By Hayeon Kim, Ji Ha Jang, Junghun James Kim, Se Young Chun
arXiv:2609.24276v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Hyperbolic vision-language models (VLMs) represent image and text features in a geometry naturally suited to hierarchy, but their adaptation to downstr...
By Andro Erdelez, Pascal Mettes, Behzad Bozorgtabar
arXiv:2610.17440v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: Dual-encoder vision-language models systematically fail at negation, scoring ''a cat without a dog'' nearly identically to ''a cat with a dog.'' We s...
By DoYoung Kim, Changkyu Choi, Ad\'in Ram\'irez Rivera, YunSeok Choi, Jee-Hyong Lee
arXiv:2505.22850v3 Announce Type: replace
Abstract: Referring Expression Counting (REC) requires distinguishing visually similar objects described by fine-grained text cues. Existing methods tackle t...
By Kostas Triaridis, Panagiotis Kaliosis, E-Ro Nguyen, Jingyi Xu, Dimitris Samaras, Hieu Le
The paper investigates whether pretrained language models can act as lightweight auxiliary supervision for supervised vision training, without requiring paired image-text data or complex objectives. Two forms of language guidance—Explicit Language Guidance (ExLG) and Implicit Language Guidance (ImLG)—are evaluated across six generalization regimes, including in‑distribution, out‑of‑distribution, shortcut resistance, texture/shape bias, adversarial robustness, and continual learning. Results show that ExLG improves in‑distribution, low‑data performance, and continual learning retention, while ImLG is more effective in shortcut‑sensitive and adversarial settings, and both add minimal parameters and training overhead.
By Shruthi Gowda, Nikita Jain, Elahe Arani, Bahram Zonooz