arXiv:2608. 07183v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Multimodal fusion architectures typically assume all modalities are available at inference, yet sensor failures, acquisition variability, and cost constraints routinely produce incomplete observations.
Summary generated by The Flow from the publisher's feed. The full article lives at arXiv Machine Learning.
arXiv:2608. 07795v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Prediction intervals for multi-modal regression with tabular variables, text, images, or other input sources are difficult to calibrate when those sources disagree or one is missing.
arXiv:2608. 05608v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Multimodal classification typically assumes all modalities are available, yet real-world inputs are often incomplete.
arXiv:2608. 02769v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Multimodal supervised learning seeks to leverage multiple heterogeneous data sources to improve predictive performance.
arXiv:2607. 27289v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: The promise of multimodal fusion lies in combining complementary sources of evidence, yet more evidence does not always yield a better prediction.
arXiv:2607. 24683v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Multi-modal classification leverages complementary information across diverse data sources to enhance predictive performance.
Cross-modal alignment (CA) and cross-modal prediction (CP) are the dominant paradigms for multimodal representation learning, yet there is no systematic understanding of when each succeeds, when each fails, and when cross-modal training helps at all -- a gap that leaves practitioners, especially in scientific domains like biomedicine or astrophysics, with heterogeneous instruments and multiple levels of organization and measurement, unable to diagnose why standard methods underperform the best single modality. We develop a unified linear framework that addresses both questions.