arXiv Computer Vision By Chanho Park, Daehyeon Choi, Jihyun Lee, Minhyuk Sung

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

Read the original on arXiv Computer Vision →

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.

Machine-generated by The Flow from the publisher's headline and feed description — not written or checked by a human. The full article lives at arXiv Computer Vision.

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
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
5d ago

SAGE: Sink-Aware Guided Emphasis for Visual Grounding in Vision-Language Decoders

The paper introduces SAGE, a lightweight method that guides decoder attention in vision-language models away from prompt‑invariant attention sinks (PIS) toward query‑dependent regions of interest (ROIs). By using token‑aligned ROI masks from vision backbones like CLIP, ViT, and DINOv3, SAGE improves visual grounding and reduces hallucinations across various VLM families. Experiments show consistent gains on public vision‑language benchmarks, especially in fine‑grained visual discrimination tasks where localized evidence is essential.

By Jeonghyo Song, YoungJoon Yoo
arXiv AI
Sep 2

Visual Attention Faithfulness in Vision-Language Models is Heterogeneous

The study investigates whether attention weights in Vision‑Language Models (VLMs) accurately reflect model reasoning for visual inputs. Using causal perturbation analysis, it identifies three distinct processing modes—Faithful‑Sufficient, Faithful‑Distributed, and Non‑Focal—indicating heterogeneous visual attention faithfulness. The research also shows that human‑annotated ground‑truth regions align with model attention in only about 60% of cases, highlighting a systematic divergence between model visual reliance and human intuition across VQA, document, and chart tasks.

By Xurui Song, Weishi Wang, Zhongqi Yue, Kuluhan Binici, Tao Bai, Hongxin Shao, Daniel Dahlmeier, Jun Luo
arXiv Computer Vision
Sep 22

Pay More Attention To Text In High-Resolution MLLMs

The paper introduces EviSpec, a training‑free compiler that generates complementary evidence specifications to improve high‑resolution multimodal large language models (MLLMs). By explicitly guiding visual search with structured evidence specifications, EviSpec achieves significant relative gains—up to 14.8% over random evidence—across five MLLMs and three benchmarks, and also sets new state‑of‑the‑art results on VQA and hallucination‑focused tasks.

By Zhongkuan Mao, Wenzhuo Zhao, Xianjie Liu, Yidong Wang, Zhao Gao, Ronghao Xian, Yao Jiang, Yi Zhang, Liangjian Wen, Keren Fu