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

ReFocus: Visual Editing as a Chain of Thought for Structured Image Understanding (2501.05452v1)

Published 9 Jan 2025 in cs.CV and cs.CL

Abstract: Structured image understanding, such as interpreting tables and charts, requires strategically refocusing across various structures and texts within an image, forming a reasoning sequence to arrive at the final answer. However, current multimodal LLMs lack this multihop selective attention capability. In this work, we introduce ReFocus, a simple yet effective framework that equips multimodal LLMs with the ability to generate "visual thoughts" by performing visual editing on the input image through code, shifting and refining their visual focuses. Specifically, ReFocus enables multimodal LLMs to generate Python codes to call tools and modify the input image, sequentially drawing boxes, highlighting sections, and masking out areas, thereby enhancing the visual reasoning process. We experiment upon a wide range of structured image understanding tasks involving tables and charts. ReFocus largely improves performance on all tasks over GPT-4o without visual editing, yielding an average gain of 11.0% on table tasks and 6.8% on chart tasks. We present an in-depth analysis of the effects of different visual edits, and reasons why ReFocus can improve the performance without introducing additional information. Further, we collect a 14k training set using ReFocus, and prove that such visual chain-of-thought with intermediate information offers a better supervision than standard VQA data, reaching a 8.0% average gain over the same model trained with QA pairs and 2.6% over CoT.

An Examination of ReFocus: Visual Editing for Structured Image Understanding

The development of advanced methods for structured image understanding continues to be an essential area of exploration, particularly in the context of visual question answering and interpretation of complex visual data like tables and charts. The paper "ReFocus: Visual Editing as a Chain of Thought for Structured Image Understanding" presents a novel approach aimed at enhancing the visual reasoning capabilities of multimodal LLMs. By introducing a framework called ReFocus, the authors propose a method that allows LLMs to apply visual edits to images, thereby improving focus and reasoning accuracy on structured visual tasks.

Conceptual Framework and Method

The ReFocus framework addresses a significant limitation in current multimodal LLMs—their lack of multihop selective attention. Traditional methods often convert visual information into text for LLMs to process, which limits the models' ability to engage in iterative visual reasoning. ReFocus modifies this approach by enabling LLMs to dynamically generate Python code to perform visual edits on images, such as drawing boxes, highlighting sections, and masking irrelevant areas. This method allows the model to refocus on critical parts of images progressively, facilitating a more effective visual reasoning process.

Empirical Evaluation

The efficacy of ReFocus was tested across various structured image tasks, focusing on visual question answering with tables (e.g., TableVQA) and different chart types (horizontal and vertical bar charts, as well as complex scientific charts). The results demonstrated substantial improvements over baseline models without visual editing capabilities. Notably, ReFocus yielded an average performance gain of 11.0% on table tasks and 6.8% on chart tasks compared to GPT-4o without visual editing. Such numerical gains highlight the potential benefits of incorporating visual editing processes as a means to enhance the reasoning capability of LLMs on structured images.

Data Collection and Fine-Tuning

Beyond experimental validation, the authors took steps to optimize LLM training with the integration of visual reasoning data. By creating a dataset comprising 14,000 examples featuring visual chain-of-thoughts and intermediate thoughts represented by bounding boxes and reasoning sequences, the research illustrates that models fine-tuned with this ReFocus data achieve better performance. The fine-tuning process highlighted an average gain of 8.0% over models trained only with conventional question-answer pairs and a 2.6% improvement over models trained with chain-of-thought data without visual editing.

Implications and Future Directions

The introduction of ReFocus represents a noteworthy advancement in the integration of visual reasoning and multimodal LLMs. The framework not only demonstrates improvements in specific visual tasks but also suggests a pathway toward more intelligent reasoning mechanisms in LLMs through the incorporation of iterative visual focus. This could lead to the development of LLMs that are better equipped to handle complex, multistep visual reasoning tasks in a real-world context.

The implications for future research are significant. The approach of embedding visual editing as part of the reasoning sequence opens up new possibilities for developing models that more closely mimic human-like reasoning processes, with the ability to emphasize relevant information dynamically and iteratively. Further exploration might focus on extending this framework to other types of visual data and task domains, potentially improving the interpretability and reliability of multimodal LLMs across diverse use cases.

In conclusion, ReFocus contributes a compelling strategy for enhancing structured image understanding, underscoring the importance of visual editing in empowering LLMs to achieve higher reasoning efficacy. The findings and methodologies established by this paper provide a foundation for future innovations in the field of multimodal machine intelligence.

User Edit Pencil Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
Authors (9)
  1. Xingyu Fu (22 papers)
  2. Minqian Liu (15 papers)
  3. Zhengyuan Yang (86 papers)
  4. John Corring (5 papers)
  5. Yijuan Lu (11 papers)
  6. Jianwei Yang (93 papers)
  7. Dan Roth (222 papers)
  8. Dinei Florencio (17 papers)
  9. Cha Zhang (23 papers)