Attentive Mask CLIP
December 16, 2022 Β· Declared Dead Β· π IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision
"No code URL or promise found in abstract"
Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner
Authors
Yifan Yang, Weiquan Huang, Yixuan Wei, Houwen Peng, Xinyang Jiang, Huiqiang Jiang, Fangyun Wei, Yin Wang, Han Hu, Lili Qiu, Yuqing Yang
arXiv ID
2212.08653
Category
cs.CV: Computer Vision
Cross-listed
eess.IV
Citations
35
Venue
IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision
Last Checked
5 months ago
Abstract
Image token removal is an efficient augmentation strategy for reducing the cost of computing image features. However, this efficient augmentation strategy has been found to adversely affect the accuracy of CLIP-based training. We hypothesize that removing a large portion of image tokens may improperly discard the semantic content associated with a given text description, thus constituting an incorrect pairing target in CLIP training. To address this issue, we propose an attentive token removal approach for CLIP training, which retains tokens with a high semantic correlation to the text description. The correlation scores are computed in an online fashion using the EMA version of the visual encoder. Our experiments show that the proposed attentive masking approach performs better than the previous method of random token removal for CLIP training. The approach also makes it efficient to apply multiple augmentation views to the image, as well as introducing instance contrastive learning tasks between these views into the CLIP framework. Compared to other CLIP improvements that combine different pre-training targets such as SLIP and MaskCLIP, our method is not only more effective, but also much more efficient. Specifically, using ViT-B and YFCC-15M dataset, our approach achieves $43.9\%$ top-1 accuracy on ImageNet-1K zero-shot classification, as well as $62.7/42.1$ and $38.0/23.2$ I2T/T2I retrieval accuracy on Flickr30K and MS COCO, which are $+1.1\%$, $+5.5/+0.9$, and $+4.4/+1.3$ higher than the SLIP method, while being $2.30\times$ faster. An efficient version of our approach running $1.16\times$ faster than the plain CLIP model achieves significant gains of $+5.3\%$, $+11.3/+8.0$, and $+9.5/+4.9$ on these benchmarks.
Community Contributions
Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!
π Similar Papers
In the same crypt β Computer Vision
π
π
Old Age
π
π
Old Age
Faster R-CNN: Towards Real-Time Object Detection with Region Proposal Networks
π
π
Old Age
SSD: Single Shot MultiBox Detector
π
π
Old Age
Squeeze-and-Excitation Networks
π
π
Old Age
Fast R-CNN
π
π
Old Age
Grad-CAM: Visual Explanations from Deep Networks via Gradient-based Localization
Died the same way β π» Ghosted
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Federated Learning: Strategies for Improving Communication Efficiency
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
In-Datacenter Performance Analysis of a Tensor Processing Unit
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Deep Convolutional Neural Networks for Computer-Aided Detection: CNN Architectures, Dataset Characteristics and Transfer Learning
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted