Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
41 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
60 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
44 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
8 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
50 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Contrastive Region Guidance: Improving Grounding in Vision-Language Models without Training (2403.02325v1)

Published 4 Mar 2024 in cs.CV, cs.AI, cs.CL, and cs.LG
Contrastive Region Guidance: Improving Grounding in Vision-Language Models without Training

Abstract: Highlighting particularly relevant regions of an image can improve the performance of vision-LLMs (VLMs) on various vision-language (VL) tasks by guiding the model to attend more closely to these regions of interest. For example, VLMs can be given a "visual prompt", where visual markers such as bounding boxes delineate key image regions. However, current VLMs that can incorporate visual guidance are either proprietary and expensive or require costly training on curated data that includes visual prompts. We introduce Contrastive Region Guidance (CRG), a training-free guidance method that enables open-source VLMs to respond to visual prompts. CRG contrasts model outputs produced with and without visual prompts, factoring out biases revealed by the model when answering without the information required to produce a correct answer (i.e., the model's prior). CRG achieves substantial improvements in a wide variety of VL tasks: When region annotations are provided, CRG increases absolute accuracy by up to 11.1% on ViP-Bench, a collection of six diverse region-based tasks such as recognition, math, and object relationship reasoning. We also show CRG's applicability to spatial reasoning, with 10% improvement on What'sUp, as well as to compositional generalization -- improving accuracy by 11.5% and 7.5% on two challenging splits from SugarCrepe -- and to image-text alignment for generated images, where we improve by up to 8.4 AUROC and 6.8 F1 points on SeeTRUE. When reference regions are absent, CRG allows us to re-rank proposed regions in referring expression comprehension and phrase grounding benchmarks like RefCOCO/+/g and Flickr30K Entities, with an average gain of 3.2% in accuracy. Our analysis explores alternative masking strategies for CRG, quantifies CRG's probability shift, and evaluates the role of region guidance strength, empirically validating CRG's design choices.

PDF HTML Abstract

Enhancing Vision-LLM Performance with Contrastive Region Guidance

Introduction to Contrastive Region Guidance (CRG)

The sphere of vision-LLMs (VLMs) has witnessed a new development with the introduction of Contrastive Region Guidance (CRG), a methodology designed to refine the performance of VLMs on tasks necessitating fine-grained visual understanding. CRG emerges as a training-free approach that allows open-source VLMs to benefit from visual prompts, such as bounding boxes, to improve attention on significant image regions without incurring the additional training costs typically associated with such improvements. This technique contrasts the model outputs produced with visual prompts against those without, effectively reducing the model's prior biases and leading to more accurate task performance.

Evaluation and Results

CRG was evaluated across a broad range of vision-language tasks, demonstrating significant improvements in model performance:

  • On the ViP-Bench, CRG enabled VLMs to achieve up to an 11.1% absolute accuracy improvement.
  • For spatial reasoning tasks, particularly the challenging scenario of What’sUp, a notable improvement of up to 10% was observed.
  • In terms of compositional generalization, evaluated using the SugarCrepe benchmark, CRG boosted accuracy by margins of 11.5% and 7.5%.
  • When applied to image-text alignment for generated images on the SeeTRUE dataset, enhancements of up to 8.4 AUROC and 6.8 F1 points were attained.

Moreover, CRG demonstrated efficacy in re-ranking region proposals from object detection models in scenarios lacking explicit region annotations. This aspect was tested on benchmarks like RefCOCO/RefCOCO+/RefCOCOg and Flickr30K Entities, where an average accuracy improvement of 3.2% was documented.

Analysis and Practical Implications

CRG represents a significant step forward in the utilization of visual prompts within vision-language tasks. Its ability to operate without the need for additional training or data, by leveraging pre-existing object detection modules to identify relevant regions or re-rank proposals, positions CRG as a versatile and powerful tool for enhancing VLMs. Furthermore, detailed analyses within the paper affirm the approach's design choices and underline its potential to not only increase model performance but also improve interpretability by aligning model focus with intuitively relevant areas of an image.

Future Directions and Considerations

The advent of CRG paves the way for myriad future directions in VLM research, notably in exploring synergies between visual and textual prompting techniques. While the paper highlights CRG’s benefits and its complementarity to fine-tuned models, it also suggests avenues for integrating richer visual and textual contexts to further boost the prompt-following capabilities of VLMs.

Conclusion

Contrastive Region Guidance emerges as a robust method for enhancing the acuity of vision-LLMs towards finer visual details, heralding a promising direction for research and application in multimodal AI systems. This approach, characterized by its training-free nature and compatibility with a wide array of existing models and tasks, offers a meaningful advance in improving the grounding and interpretability of VLMs. The findings underscore the potential benefits of CRG in not only improving existing models but also in fostering the development of more efficacious multimodal AI frameworks.

File Document Download Save Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com PDF File Document Download Save Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Markdown Bookmark Chat Bubble Oval Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Chat (Pro)
Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (63)
  1. Vqa: Visual question answering. In Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on computer vision, pages 2425–2433, 2015.
  2. Exploring visual prompts for adapting large-scale models, 2022.
  3. Qwen-vl: A versatile vision-language model for understanding, localization, text reading, and beyond. arXiv preprint arXiv:2308.12966, 2023a.
  4. Sequential modeling enables scalable learning for large vision models, 2023b.
  5. Visual Prompting via Image Inpainting. In NeurIPS, 2022. ISBN 9781713871088.
  6. Making Large Multimodal Models Understand Arbitrary Visual Prompts, 2023. URL http://arxiv.org/abs/2312.00784.
  7. Shikra: Unleashing multimodal llm’s referential dialogue magic. arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.15195, 2023a.
  8. Focalclick: Towards practical interactive image segmentation. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), pages 1300–1309, June 2022.
  9. Pali-x: On scaling up a multilingual vision and language model. arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.18565, 2023b.
  10. Generative bias for robust visual question answering. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 11681–11690, 2023.
  11. InstructBLIP: Towards general-purpose vision-language models with instruction tuning. In Thirty-seventh Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, 2023. URL https://openreview.net/forum?id=vvoWPYqZJA.
  12. An image is worth 16x16 words: Transformers for image recognition at scale. arXiv preprint arXiv:2010.11929, 2020.
  13. Make-A-Scene: Scene-Based Text-to-Image Generation with Human Priors. In ECCV, 2022. URL http://arxiv.org/abs/2203.13131.
  14. Making the v in vqa matter: Elevating the role of image understanding in visual question answering. In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 6904–6913, 2017.
  15. J. Ho and T. Salimans. Classifier-free diffusion guidance. In NeurIPS 2021 Workshop on Deep Generative Models and Downstream Applications, 2021. URL https://openreview.net/forum?id=qw8AKxfYbI.
  16. spacy: Industrial-strength natural language processing in python, 2020. URL https://spacy.io.
  17. Sugarcrepe: Fixing hackable benchmarks for vision-language compositionality. In Thirty-Seventh Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems Datasets and Benchmarks Track, 2023.
  18. Mdetr–modulated detection for end-to-end multi-modal understanding. arXiv preprint arXiv:2104.12763, 2021.
  19. What’s “up” with vision-language models? investigating their struggle with spatial reasoning. In Proceedings of the 2023 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pages 9161–9175, 2023.
  20. Referitgame: Referring to objects in photographs of natural scenes. In Proceedings of the 2014 conference on empirical methods in natural language processing (EMNLP), pages 787–798, 2014.
  21. MaPLe: Multi-modal Prompt Learning. In CVPR, 2023. ISBN 9798350301298. doi: 10.1109/CVPR52729.2023.01832.
  22. Segment anything. arXiv:2304.02643, 2023.
  23. Guiding Image Captioning Models Toward More Specific Captions. In ICCV, 2023. URL http://arxiv.org/abs/2307.16686.
  24. Mitigating Object Hallucinations in Large Vision-Language Models through Visual Contrastive Decoding, 2023. URL http://arxiv.org/abs/2311.16922.
  25. Blip-2: Bootstrapping language-image pre-training with frozen image encoders and large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2301.12597, 2023a.
  26. Grounded language-image pre-training. In CVPR, 2022.
  27. Contrastive decoding: Open-ended text generation as optimization. In A. Rogers, J. Boyd-Graber, and N. Okazaki, editors, Proceedings of the 61st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers), 2023b.
  28. Microsoft coco: Common objects in context. In Computer Vision–ECCV 2014: 13th European Conference, Zurich, Switzerland, September 6-12, 2014, Proceedings, Part V 13, pages 740–755. Springer, 2014.
  29. Visual instruction tuning. In Thirty-seventh Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, 2023a. URL https://openreview.net/forum?id=w0H2xGHlkw.
  30. Llava-next: Improved reasoning, ocr, and world knowledge, January 2024a. URL https://llava-vl.github.io/blog/2024-01-30-llava-next/.
  31. Visual instruction tuning. Advances in neural information processing systems, 36, 2024b.
  32. Grounding dino: Marrying dino with grounded pre-training for open-set object detection. arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.05499, 2023b.
  33. Answer questions with right image regions: A visual attention regularization approach. ACM Transactions on Multimedia Computing, Communications, and Applications (TOMM), 18(4):1–18, 2022.
  34. Crepe: Can vision-language foundation models reason compositionally? In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 10910–10921, 2023.
  35. Generation and comprehension of unambiguous object descriptions. 2016 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), pages 11–20, 2015. URL https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:8745888.
  36. S. O’Brien and M. Lewis. Contrastive decoding improves reasoning in large language models, 2023.
  37. Gpt-4 technical report, 2023.
  38. Flickr30k entities: Collecting region-to-phrase correspondences for richer image-to-sentence models. IJCV, 123(1):74–93, 2017.
  39. Learning transferable visual models from natural language supervision. In M. Meila and T. Zhang, editors, Proceedings of the 38th International Conference on Machine Learning, ICML 2021, 18-24 July 2021, Virtual Event, volume 139 of Proceedings of Machine Learning Research, pages 8748–8763. PMLR, 2021. URL http://proceedings.mlr.press/v139/radford21a.html.
  40. cola: A benchmark for compositional text-to-image retrieval. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 36, 2024.
  41. Grounded sam: Assembling open-world models for diverse visual tasks, 2024.
  42. “why should I trust you?”: Explaining the predictions of any classifier. In J. DeNero, M. Finlayson, and S. Reddy, editors, Proceedings of the 2016 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Demonstrations, pages 97–101, San Diego, California, June 2016. Association for Computational Linguistics. doi: 10.18653/v1/N16-3020. URL https://aclanthology.org/N16-3020.
  43. Photorealistic text-to-image diffusion models with deep language understanding. In A. H. Oh, A. Agarwal, D. Belgrave, and K. Cho, editors, Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 2022. URL https://openreview.net/forum?id=08Yk-n5l2Al.
  44. Stay on topic with classifier-free guidance. arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.17806, 2023.
  45. Taking a hint: Leveraging explanations to make vision and language models more grounded. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF international conference on computer vision, pages 2591–2600, 2019.
  46. Trusting your evidence: Hallucinate less with context-aware decoding, 2023.
  47. What does clip know about a red circle? visual prompt engineering for vlms. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV), pages 11987–11997, October 2023.
  48. FLAVA: A foundational language and vision alignment model. In CVPR, 2022.
  49. Alpha-clip: A clip model focusing on wherever you want, 2023.
  50. Winoground: Probing vision and language models for visio-linguistic compositionality. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 5238–5248, 2022.
  51. Imagen editor and editbench: Advancing and evaluating text-guided image inpainting. In 2023 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), pages 18359–18369, Los Alamitos, CA, USA, jun 2023. IEEE Computer Society. doi: 10.1109/CVPR52729.2023.01761. URL https://doi.ieeecomputersociety.org/10.1109/CVPR52729.2023.01761.
  52. J. Wu and R. Mooney. Self-critical reasoning for robust visual question answering. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 32, 2019.
  53. Set-of-Mark Prompting Unleashes Extraordinary Visual Grounding in GPT-4V, 2023. URL http://arxiv.org/abs/2310.11441.
  54. CPT: Colorful Prompt Tuning for Pre-trained Vision-Language Models, 2021. URL http://arxiv.org/abs/2109.11797.
  55. What you see is what you read? improving text-image alignment evaluation. In Thirty-seventh Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, 2023. URL https://openreview.net/forum?id=j5AoleAIru.
  56. Visfis: Visual feature importance supervision with right-for-the-right-reason objectives. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 35:17057–17072, 2022.
  57. From image descriptions to visual denotations: New similarity metrics for semantic inference over event descriptions. Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics, 2:67–78, 2014.
  58. MERLOT: Multimodal Neural Script Knowledge Models. In NeurIPS, 2021. URL http://arxiv.org/abs/2106.02636.
  59. Glipv2: Unifying localization and vision-language understanding. arXiv preprint arXiv:2206.05836, 2022.
  60. Yin and yang: Balancing and answering binary visual questions. In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 5014–5022, 2016.
  61. Gpt4roi: Instruction tuning large language model on region-of-interest, 2023.
  62. Mitigating object hallucination in large vision-language models via classifier-free guidance, 2024.
  63. Segment everything everywhere all at once. In Thirty-seventh Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, 2023. URL https://openreview.net/forum?id=UHBrWeFWlL.
User Edit Pencil Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
Authors (4)
  1. David Wan (16 papers)
  2. Jaemin Cho (36 papers)
  3. Elias Stengel-Eskin (49 papers)
  4. Mohit Bansal (304 papers)
Citations (20)
View on Semantic Scholar