VLind-Bench: Measuring Language Priors in Large Vision-Language Models

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2406.08702v4
• Date: Sat, 08 Feb 2025 23:14:12 GMT
• Title: VLind-Bench: Measuring Language Priors in Large Vision-Language Models
• Authors: Kang-il Lee, Minbeom Kim, Seunghyun Yoon, Minsung Kim, Dongryeol Lee, Hyukhun Koh, Kyomin Jung,
• Abstract summary: Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs) have demonstrated outstanding performance across various multimodal tasks.<n>They suffer from a problem known as language prior, where responses are generated based solely on textual patterns while disregarding image information.<n>We propose a new benchmark called VLind-Bench, which is the first benchmark specifically designed to measure the language priors of LVLMs.
• Score: 16.69706832823002
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/
• Abstract: Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs) have demonstrated outstanding performance across various multimodal tasks. However, they suffer from a problem known as language prior, where responses are generated based solely on textual patterns while disregarding image information. Addressing the issue of language prior is crucial, as it can lead to undesirable biases or hallucinations when dealing with images that are out of training distribution. Despite its importance, current methods for accurately measuring language priors in LVLMs are poorly studied. Although existing benchmarks based on counterfactual or out-of-distribution images can partially be used to measure language priors, they fail to disentangle language priors from other confounding factors. To this end, we propose a new benchmark called VLind-Bench, which is the first benchmark specifically designed to measure the language priors, or blindness, of LVLMs. It not only includes tests on counterfactual images to assess language priors but also involves a series of tests to evaluate more basic capabilities such as commonsense knowledge, visual perception, and commonsense biases. For each instance in our benchmark, we ensure that all these basic tests are passed before evaluating the language priors, thereby minimizing the influence of other factors on the assessment. The evaluation and analysis of recent LVLMs in our benchmark reveal that almost all models exhibit a significant reliance on language priors, presenting a strong challenge in the field.

Related papers

• Language Matters: How Do Multilingual Input and Reasoning Paths Affect Large Reasoning Models? [59.970391602080205]
  Despite multilingual training, LRMs tend to default to reasoning in high-resource languages at test time.<n>Cultural reasoning degrades performance on reasoning tasks but benefits cultural tasks, while safety evaluations exhibit language-specific behavior.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-23T02:46:18Z)
• Cross-Image Contrastive Decoding: Precise, Lossless Suppression of Language Priors in Large Vision-Language Models [11.385588803559733]
  Over-reliance on language priors is a major cause of hallucinations in Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs)<n>Recent studies have explored contrastive decoding as a training-free solution.<n>We propose Cross-Image Contrastive Decoding (CICD), a simple yet effective training-free method that uses unrelated images as contrastive visual inputs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-15T18:16:56Z)
• Randomly Sampled Language Reasoning Problems Reveal Limits of LLMs [8.146860674148044]
  We attempt to measure models' language understanding capacity while circumventing the risk of dataset recall. We parameterize large families of language tasks recognized by deterministic finite automata (DFAs) We find that, even in the strikingly simple setting of 3-state DFAs, LLMs underperform un parameterized ngram models on both language recognition and synthesis tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-06T07:57:51Z)
• Aggregation Artifacts in Subjective Tasks Collapse Large Language Models' Posteriors [74.04775677110179]
  In-context Learning (ICL) has become the primary method for performing natural language tasks with Large Language Models (LLMs) In this work, we examine whether this is the result of the aggregation used in corresponding datasets, where trying to combine low-agreement, disparate annotations might lead to annotation artifacts that create detrimental noise in the prompt. Our results indicate that aggregation is a confounding factor in the modeling of subjective tasks, and advocate focusing on modeling individuals instead.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-17T17:16:00Z)
• One Language, Many Gaps: Evaluating Dialect Fairness and Robustness of Large Language Models in Reasoning Tasks [68.33068005789116]
  We present the first study aimed at objectively assessing the fairness and robustness of Large Language Models (LLMs) in handling dialects in canonical reasoning tasks. We hire AAVE speakers, including experts with computer science backgrounds, to rewrite seven popular benchmarks, such as HumanEval and GSM8K. Our findings reveal that textbfalmost all of these widely used models show significant brittleness and unfairness to queries in AAVE.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-14T18:44:23Z)
• Improving Visual Commonsense in Language Models via Multiple Image Generation [41.565399860320966]
  Existing large language models (LLMs) are primarily trained using textual data only. Visual Language Models, which excel at visually-oriented tasks, often fail at non-visual tasks such as basic commonsense reasoning. This divergence highlights a critical challenge - the integration of robust visual understanding with foundational text-based language reasoning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-19T15:17:10Z)
• Analyzing and Adapting Large Language Models for Few-Shot Multilingual NLU: Are We There Yet? [82.02076369811402]
  Supervised fine-tuning (SFT), supervised instruction tuning (SIT) and in-context learning (ICL) are three alternative, de facto standard approaches to few-shot learning. We present an extensive and systematic comparison of the three approaches, testing them on 6 high- and low-resource languages, three different NLU tasks, and a myriad of language and domain setups. Our observations show that supervised instruction tuning has the best trade-off between performance and resource requirements.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-04T10:48:13Z)
• Disco-Bench: A Discourse-Aware Evaluation Benchmark for Language Modelling [70.23876429382969]
  We propose a benchmark that can evaluate intra-sentence discourse properties across a diverse set of NLP tasks. Disco-Bench consists of 9 document-level testsets in the literature domain, which contain rich discourse phenomena. For linguistic analysis, we also design a diagnostic test suite that can examine whether the target models learn discourse knowledge.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-16T15:18:25Z)
• Revisiting the Role of Language Priors in Vision-Language Models [90.0317841097143]
  Vision-language models (VLMs) are applied to a variety of visual understanding tasks in a zero-shot fashion, without any fine-tuning. We study $textitgenerative VLMs$ that are trained for next-word generation given an image. We explore their zero-shot performance on the illustrative task of image-text retrieval across 8 popular vision-language benchmarks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-02T19:19:43Z)
• Pre-Trained Language Models for Interactive Decision-Making [72.77825666035203]
  We describe a framework for imitation learning in which goals and observations are represented as a sequence of embeddings. We demonstrate that this framework enables effective generalization across different environments. For test tasks involving novel goals or novel scenes, initializing policies with language models improves task completion rates by 43.6%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-02-03T18:55:52Z)
• IGLUE: A Benchmark for Transfer Learning across Modalities, Tasks, and Languages [87.5457337866383]
  We introduce the Image-Grounded Language Understanding Evaluation benchmark. IGLUE brings together visual question answering, cross-modal retrieval, grounded reasoning, and grounded entailment tasks across 20 diverse languages. We find that translate-test transfer is superior to zero-shot transfer and that few-shot learning is hard to harness for many tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-01-27T18:53:22Z)
• Does Vision-and-Language Pretraining Improve Lexical Grounding? [25.357191933430627]
  Vision-and-Language models are trained jointly on text and image or video data. It is not yet known how the internal linguistic representations themselves compare to their text-only counterparts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-09-21T15:12:39Z)
• It's All in the Heads: Using Attention Heads as a Baseline for Cross-Lingual Transfer in Commonsense Reasoning [4.200736775540874]
  We design a simple approach to commonsense reasoning which trains a linear classifier with weights of multi-head attention as features. The method performs competitively with recent supervised and unsupervised approaches for commonsense reasoning. Most of the performance is given by the same small subset of attention heads for all studied languages.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-22T21:25:43Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.