The paper investigates whether language prompts selected by zero‑shot accuracy remain effective after visual adaptation in source‑free cross‑domain few‑shot learning. Using a paired protocol, the authors compare generic class‑name templates with detailed class descriptions before and after Low‑Rank Adaptation (LoRA) on datasets such as EuroSAT, CropDisease, ISIC, and ChestX. They identify two regimes: semantic saturation, where detailed prompts are already useful before adaptation, and semantic emergence, where detailed prompts become more useful only after visual representation updates, driven by changes in prediction patterns.
By Wei Liu, Xing Deng, Haijian Shao
arXiv:2608. 02830v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Many-shot in-context learning (ICL) lets vision-language models (VLMs) adapt from image--label demonstrations without weight updates, and is widely assumed to improve as more demonstrations are supplied.
By Mohammad Rostami
arXiv:2608.21819v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: Reliable image captioning in Vision-Language Models (VLMs) requires captions to be both precise and complete, avoiding unsupported object mentions wh...
By Jihyung Ko, Eunji Jung, Hyeongsub Kim, Ziseok Lee, Jae Won Cho, Sanghyun Jo, Kyungsu Kim
The paper introduces a free, label‑free visual evidence signal that improves fine‑grained vision‑language reasoning. By selecting image crops that maximize the model’s answer distribution peak, the method locates answer‑bearing regions without training or annotations, boosting accuracy from 70 % to 85 %. The evidence gap also complements model confidence, enabling better correctness prediction and error flagging.
By Santi Ram Tiwari, Nihal Naik, Devbrat Pandey, Nishant Sinha
The paper investigates image tokenizers as the visual language of unified multimodal models by creating a controlled autoregressive testbed that tracks task‑specific validation losses during multimodal continual pretraining across text, image, text‑to‑image, and image‑to‑text predictions. It shows that losses must be analyzed by task, that the loss–performance relationship varies with the token space, and that better reconstruction does not always lead to stronger downstream performance. The study also demonstrates how tokenizer design choices—such as discriminator use, semantic supervision, and vocabulary size—affect joint modeling and downstream results.
The paper investigates why multimodal large language models (MLLMs) struggle with vision‑centric tasks when visual evidence conflicts with pretrained language knowledge. Using image reconstruction and a new WhatIfVis benchmark, the authors show that MLLMs preserve coarse‑grained visual attributes but fail to consistently use them, and that supervised fine‑tuning and activation patching can improve controllability of visual context sensitivity. The study demonstrates that the main bottleneck lies in the models’ inability to reliably regulate their reliance on visual evidence rather than in visual perception itself.
By Jiaang Li, Chengzu Li, Zhaochong An, Yifei Yuan, Xi Liu, Serge Belongie, V\'esteinn Sn{\ae}bjarnarson