arXiv Computer Vision

From Retrieval to Recognition:How Vision--Language Models Become OCR Specialists

The paper investigates how general vision‑language models (VLMs) develop specialized optical character recognition (OCR) capabilities. By applying a causal intervention protocol, the authors identify sparse, stable OCR‑head sets in several VLMs and show that these heads largely overlap with textual retrieval/copy heads found in general VLMs. The study concludes that full‑sequence OCR functions as a dense multimodal copy‑and‑paste mechanism, and that when a VLM is fine‑tuned for OCR, it largely preserves the same head identities while redistributing their functional and causal strengths.

Hugging Face Trending Papers
Aug 27

Retrieval Heads Meet Vision: Uncovering How VLMs Locate and Extract Visual Information

The paper demonstrates that vision‑language models (VLMs) possess a small set of attention heads, called Visual Retrieval Heads (VRHs), that are causally responsible for linking text prompts to specific image regions. By adapting head‑scoring techniques from language models, the authors identify VRHs as the heads whose attention from output prediction tokens, summed over the ground‑truth referent region, most reliably indicates causal grounding. Experiments across eleven VLMs and five referring‑expression benchmarks show that masking the top 20 VRHs can drop grounding accuracy by up to 80 percentage points, while random masking has little effect, and that VRHs generalize across diverse visual tasks and transfer across models sharing an LLM backbone.

arXiv Computer Vision
Aug 28

Retrieval Heads Meet Vision: Uncovering How VLMs Locate and Extract Visual Information

The paper introduces Visual Retrieval Heads (VRHs), a small fraction of attention heads in vision‑language models that are causally responsible for grounding text descriptions to image regions. By recasting head‑scoring methods and evaluating across eleven VLMs and five benchmarks, the authors show that masking the top 20 VRHs can drop grounding accuracy by up to 80 percentage points, while random masking has little effect. VRHs generalize across various visual reference tasks, preserve output format while corrupting localization, and transfer causally across models sharing an LLM backbone.

By Chanho Park, Daehyeon Choi, Jihyun Lee, Minhyuk Sung
arXiv AI
Sep 17

Using OCR Heads to Verbalize Image Semantics

The paper investigates how vision‑language models (VLMs) perform optical character recognition (OCR) by identifying attention heads that are causally necessary for OCR across four models. These heads are shown to be general‑purpose, producing interpretable semantic features for any image token, such as recognizing the word "bike" or the concept "feathers". By collapsing the heads’ attention weights into a verbalization lens transformation, the authors reveal that image representations align with language from early layers and can even be used to edit non‑word concepts in images, demonstrating the broader utility of this subspace.

By Sheridan Feucht, Benno Krojer, Sarah Wang, Henry Abrahamsen, Byron C. Wallace, David Bau
arXiv Computer Vision
Sep 1

Can Retrieval Heads See Images? Multimodal Retrieval Heads in Long-Context Vision-Language Models

arXiv:2605.27243v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Large vision-language models increasingly rely on long-context modeling to reason over documents, hour-level videos, and long-horizon agent traject...

By Aaron Branson Cigres Li, Zhaowei Wang, Yu Zhao, Yiming Du, Haobo Li, Xiyu Ren, Ginny Wong, Simon See, Lishu Luo, Haodong Duan, Pasquale Minervini, Yangqiu Song
arXiv Computation and Language
Sep 25

Free the Language Model From the Vision Encoder: Semantic Serialization as a Perception Interface for Small Language Models

The paper introduces a perception interface that separates vision from language in vision‑language models. A frozen perception stack detects objects, a deterministic semantic serializer converts the perceived state into text, and a standard text‑only large language model (LLM) answers questions. Experiments on a campus‑robot benchmark show that this serialized interface outperforms a zero‑shot VLM of the same language‑model size, especially as the language model shrinks, and that the advantage persists under paraphrase and different supervision regimes.

By Cong Xu, Ravi Sankar
arXiv Computer Vision
Sep 23

Reading Right, Answering Wrong: How Visual Configuration Changes Affect Evidence Use in VLMs

Vision‑language models (VLMs) can lose accuracy when images are resized, even with minimal changes. The study shows that such small visual configuration changes—like tiling or token arrangement—cause more correctness flips across multiple checkpoints and benchmarks. Interestingly, in many cases the models still read the correct answer but fail to use it, and attention interventions reveal that configuration shifts weaken the use of readable information. By guiding models with field cues and their own transcriptions, the authors correct 97.2% of these errors.

By Dingyang Lin, Yingfeng Luo, Chenglong Wang, Chenwei Zhu, Anxiang Ma, Jingbo Zhu, Tong Xiao