Zero-Shot Visual Reasoning by Vision-Language Models: Benchmarking and Analysis

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2409.00106v1
• Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2024 14:43:54 GMT
• Title: Zero-Shot Visual Reasoning by Vision-Language Models: Benchmarking and Analysis
• Authors: Aishik Nagar, Shantanu Jaiswal, Cheston Tan,
• Abstract summary: Vision-language models (VLMs) have shown impressive zero- and few-shot performance on real-world visual question answering benchmarks. It remains unclear whether a VLM's apparent visual reasoning performance is due to its world knowledge, or due to actual visual reasoning capabilities.
• Score: 6.704529554100875
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Vision-language models (VLMs) have shown impressive zero- and few-shot performance on real-world visual question answering (VQA) benchmarks, alluding to their capabilities as visual reasoning engines. However, the benchmarks being used conflate "pure" visual reasoning with world knowledge, and also have questions that involve a limited number of reasoning steps. Thus, it remains unclear whether a VLM's apparent visual reasoning performance is due to its world knowledge, or due to actual visual reasoning capabilities. To clarify this ambiguity, we systematically benchmark and dissect the zero-shot visual reasoning capabilities of VLMs through synthetic datasets that require minimal world knowledge, and allow for analysis over a broad range of reasoning steps. We focus on two novel aspects of zero-shot visual reasoning: i) evaluating the impact of conveying scene information as either visual embeddings or purely textual scene descriptions to the underlying large language model (LLM) of the VLM, and ii) comparing the effectiveness of chain-of-thought prompting to standard prompting for zero-shot visual reasoning. We find that the underlying LLMs, when provided textual scene descriptions, consistently perform better compared to being provided visual embeddings. In particular, 18% higher accuracy is achieved on the PTR dataset. We also find that CoT prompting performs marginally better than standard prompting only for the comparatively large GPT-3.5-Turbo (175B) model, and does worse for smaller-scale models. This suggests the emergence of CoT abilities for visual reasoning in LLMs at larger scales even when world knowledge is limited. Overall, we find limitations in the abilities of VLMs and LLMs for more complex visual reasoning, and highlight the important role that LLMs can play in visual reasoning.

Related papers

• VHELM: A Holistic Evaluation of Vision Language Models [75.88987277686914]
  We present the Holistic Evaluation of Vision Language Models (VHELM) VHELM aggregates various datasets to cover one or more of the 9 aspects: visual perception, knowledge, reasoning, bias, fairness, multilinguality, robustness, toxicity, and safety. Our framework is designed to be lightweight and automatic so that evaluation runs are cheap and fast.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-09T17:46:34Z)
• Multimodal Causal Reasoning Benchmark: Challenging Vision Large Language Models to Infer Causal Links Between Siamese Images [19.923665989164387]
  We propose a novel Multimodal Causal Reasoning benchmark, namely MuCR, to challenge Large Language Models. Specifically, we introduce a prompt-driven image synthesis approach to create siamese images with embedded semantic causality and visual cues. Our extensive experiments reveal that the current state-of-the-art VLLMs are not as skilled at multimodal causal reasoning as we might have hoped.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-15T12:04:32Z)
• BEAF: Observing BEfore-AFter Changes to Evaluate Hallucination in Vision-language Models [20.697019266074747]
  Vision language models (VLMs) perceive the world through a combination of a visual encoder and a large language model (LLM) Recent studies show that VLMs are vulnerable to hallucination. We introduce new metrics: True Understanding (TU), IGnorance (IG), StuBbornness (SB), and InDecision (ID)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-18T12:11:12Z)
• Good Questions Help Zero-Shot Image Reasoning [110.1671684828904]
  Question-Driven Visual Exploration (QVix) is a novel prompting strategy that enhances the exploratory capabilities of large vision-language models (LVLMs) QVix enables a wider exploration of visual scenes, improving the LVLMs' reasoning accuracy and depth in tasks such as visual question answering and visual entailment. Our evaluations on various challenging zero-shot vision-language benchmarks, including ScienceQA and fine-grained visual classification, demonstrate that QVix significantly outperforms existing methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-04T03:18:51Z)
• Behind the Magic, MERLIM: Multi-modal Evaluation Benchmark for Large Image-Language Models [50.653838482083614]
  This paper introduces a scalable test-bed to assess the capabilities of IT-LVLMs on fundamental computer vision tasks. MERLIM contains over 300K image-question pairs and has a strong focus on detecting cross-modal "hallucination" events in IT-LVLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-03T16:39:36Z)
• Rephrase, Augment, Reason: Visual Grounding of Questions for Vision-Language Models [59.05769810380928]
  Rephrase, Augment and Reason (RepARe) is a gradient-free framework that extracts salient details about the image using the underlying vision-language model. We show that RepARe can result in a 3.85% (absolute) increase in zero-shot accuracy on VQAv2, 6.41%, and 7.94% points increase on A-OKVQA, and VizWiz respectively.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-09T16:57:57Z)
• See, Think, Confirm: Interactive Prompting Between Vision and Language Models for Knowledge-based Visual Reasoning [60.43585179885355]
  We propose a novel framework named Interactive Prompting Visual Reasoner (IPVR) for few-shot knowledge-based visual reasoning. IPVR contains three stages, see, think and confirm. We conduct experiments on a range of knowledge-based visual reasoning datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-01-12T18:59:50Z)
• Understanding ME? Multimodal Evaluation for Fine-grained Visual Commonsense [98.70218717851665]
  It is unclear whether the models really understand the visual scene and underlying commonsense knowledge due to limited evaluation data resources. We present a Multimodal Evaluation (ME) pipeline to automatically generate question-answer pairs to test models' understanding of the visual scene, text, and related knowledge. We then take a step further to show that training with the ME data boosts the model's performance in standard VCR evaluation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-10T21:44:33Z)

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.