Does CLIP Bind Concepts? Probing Compositionality in Large Image Models

December 20, 2022 Β· Declared Dead Β· πŸ› Findings

πŸ‘» CAUSE OF DEATH: Ghosted
No code link whatsoever

"No code URL or promise found in abstract"

Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner

Authors Martha Lewis, Nihal V. Nayak, Peilin Yu, Qinan Yu, Jack Merullo, Stephen H. Bach, Ellie Pavlick arXiv ID 2212.10537 Category cs.CV: Computer Vision Cross-listed cs.AI, cs.CL Citations 99 Venue Findings Last Checked 4 months ago
Abstract
Large-scale neural network models combining text and images have made incredible progress in recent years. However, it remains an open question to what extent such models encode compositional representations of the concepts over which they operate, such as correctly identifying "red cube" by reasoning over the constituents "red" and "cube". In this work, we focus on the ability of a large pretrained vision and language model (CLIP) to encode compositional concepts and to bind variables in a structure-sensitive way (e.g., differentiating "cube behind sphere" from "sphere behind cube"). To inspect the performance of CLIP, we compare several architectures from research on compositional distributional semantics models (CDSMs), a line of research that attempts to implement traditional compositional linguistic structures within embedding spaces. We benchmark them on three synthetic datasets - single-object, two-object, and relational - designed to test concept binding. We find that CLIP can compose concepts in a single-object setting, but in situations where concept binding is needed, performance drops dramatically. At the same time, CDSMs also perform poorly, with best performance at chance level.
Community shame:
Not yet rated
Community Contributions

Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!

πŸ“œ Similar Papers

In the same crypt β€” Computer Vision

πŸŒ… πŸŒ… Old Age

Fast R-CNN

Ross Girshick

cs.CV πŸ› ICCV πŸ“š 27.7K cites 11 years ago

Died the same way β€” πŸ‘» Ghosted