Text encoders bottleneck compositionality in contrastive vision-language models

Published: 07 Oct 2023, Last Modified: 01 Dec 2023EMNLP 2023 MainEveryoneRevisionsBibTeX
Submission Type: Regular Long Paper
Submission Track: Interpretability, Interactivity, and Analysis of Models for NLP
Submission Track 2: Language Grounding to Vision, Robotics and Beyond
Keywords: vision-language, text encoders, interpretability
Abstract: Performant vision-language (VL) models like CLIP represent captions using a single vector. How much information about language is lost in this bottleneck? We first curate CompPrompts, a set of increasingly compositional image captions that VL models should be able to capture (e.g., single object, to object+property, to multiple interacting objects). Then, we train text-only recovery probes that aim to reconstruct captions from single-vector text representations produced by several VL models. This approach does not require images, allowing us to test on a broader range of scenes compared to prior work. We find that: 1) CLIP’s text encoder falls short on more compositional inputs, including object relationships, attribute-object association, counting, and negations; 2) some text encoders work significantly better than others; and 3) text-only recovery performance predicts multimodal matching performance on ControlledImCaps: a new evaluation benchmark we collect and release consisting of fine-grained compositional images and captions. Specifically, our results suggest text-only recoverability is a necessary (but not sufficient) condition for modeling compositional factors in contrastive VL models. We release our datasets and code.
Submission Number: 2005
Loading