REVIEW 7 cited by
Language Models Can See: Plugging Visual Controls in Text Generation
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
Signed reviews
read the original abstract
Generative language models (LMs) such as GPT-2/3 can be prompted to generate text with remarkable quality. While they are designed for text-prompted generation, it remains an open question how the generation process could be guided by modalities beyond text such as images. In this work, we propose a training-free framework, called MAGIC (iMAge-Guided text generatIon with CLIP), for plugging in visual controls in the generation process and enabling LMs to perform multimodal tasks (e.g., image captioning) in a zero-shot manner. MAGIC is a simple yet efficient plug-and-play framework, which directly combines an off-the-shelf LM (i.e., GPT-2) and an image-text matching model (i.e., CLIP) for image-grounded text generation. During decoding, MAGIC influences the generation of the LM by introducing a CLIP-induced score, called magic score, which regularizes the generated result to be semantically related to a given image while being coherent to the previously generated context. Notably, the proposed decoding scheme does not involve any gradient update operation, therefore being computationally efficient. On the challenging task of zero-shot image captioning, MAGIC outperforms the state-of-the-art method by notable margins with a nearly 27 times decoding speedup. MAGIC is a flexible framework and is theoretically compatible with any text generation tasks that incorporate image grounding. In the experiments, we showcase that it is also capable of performing visually grounded story generation given both an image and a text prompt.
Forward citations
Cited by 7 Pith papers
-
Watching Synthetic Videos: Aligning Cross-modal Representations with Visual Synthesis for Zero-shot Video Captioning
WSV trains a zero-shot video captioner on synthetic video latents generated from text, then uses a prompter plus GPT-2 at inference, reaching 52.0 BLEU@4 and 95.7 CIDEr on MSVD without seeing real video during training.
-
Adjudicated Captioning: Multi-Agent Alignment Scoring and Consensus-Distilled Beam Arbitration for Strict Zero-Shot Image Captioning
A multi-checkpoint alignment pipeline lifts zero-shot COCO captioning CIDEr from 108.0 to 117.6 by adding a cross-attention verifier and self-supervised beam rerankers to an unchanged IFCap captioner.
-
Modality Gap-Driven Subspace Alignment Training Paradigm For Multimodal Large Language Models
ReAlign corrects the modality gap in unpaired data to let MLLMs learn visual distributions from text alone before instruction tuning, reducing dependence on expensive paired corpora.
-
Can Video LLMs Refuse to Answer? Alignment for Answerability in Video Large Language Models
Video-LLMs can be trained, via SFT or DPO on a new synthetic dataset UVQA, to refuse questions that cannot be answered from the video content, with modest cost to answerable QA performance.
-
InsTALL: Context-aware Instructional Task Assistance with Multi-modal Large Language Models
InsTALL feeds a procedural graph mined from training videos into a multimodal LLM, improving task recognition, action recognition, next-action and plan prediction, and error detection on instructional videos.
-
Unleashing Text-to-Image Diffusion Prior for Zero-Shot Image Captioning
PCM-Net improves zero-shot image captioning by training on synthetic image-caption pairs and replacing defective visual patches with concept text features, achieving new SOTA on MSCOCO and Flickr30k.
-
How Vision-Language Tasks Benefit from Large Pre-trained Models: A Survey
A survey that categorizes pre-trained-model-based vision-language methods into four challenge-driven paradigms, with performance tables and a discussion of risks.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.