This work compares six off-the-shelf VLMs against a transparent baseline that uses classical SIFT keypoint matching and a signal-quality index over retrieved images, and shows that a learned visual representation is not the bottleneck for this task: given retrieved images, a shape-appropriate classical similarity suffices.
Abstract
Recent work reports that vision--language models (VLMs) struggle to establish and maintain stable reference in repeated reference games. Rather than ask which VLM does best, we ask a more basic question: do you need a large pretrained VLM for this at all? On grounding a single director utterance to one of twelve tangram silhouettes, we compare six off-the-shelf VLMs against a transparent baseline that uses \emph{no learned visual representation}: classical SIFT keypoint matching and a signal-quality index over retrieved images. On identical trials, the transparent baseline matches the strongest VLM (SigLIP-large) and significantly outperforms the other five, including every CLIP and OpenCLIP variant. The baseline additionally retrieves external images, so this is not a matched-information comparison; what it shows is that a learned \emph{visual} representation is not the bottleneck for this task: given retrieved images, a shape-appropriate classical similarity suffices. Along the way we find that abstract-grounding ability varies widely across VLMs (15--39\% top-1; chance 8.33\%, humans $\approx$77--80\%), so the weakness is model-specific rather than intrinsic to contrastive pretraining; on the 1{,}013-shape KiloGram benchmark the pattern generalizes for CLIP, with per-shape difficulty tracking human shape-nameability. The pipeline is a classical, inspectable alternative rather than a learned one. We close by sketching how an explicit, inspectable representation of listener-side pact state could carry this approach into interactive multi-turn reference, which we leave to future work. Code available in supplementary material.
This work introduces Visual Retrieval Heads (VRHs), a small subset of attention heads that are causally responsible for grounding text descriptions to image regions, and shows that scoring attention from output prediction tokens with a sum over the ground-truth referent region most reliably identifies causal heads.
Chanho Park, Daehyeon Choi, Jihyun Lee et al.· 1 citation· ⚡1
Vision-language models (VLMs) increasingly reason over visual evidence that is cropped, segmented, retrieved, or revealed over time. Yet most VQA benchmarks present the complete image and question at once. We ask what models lose when the same information is fragmented. We introduce Layered-VQA, with 93 scenes and 300...
L. D. M. S. Sai Teja, Ufaq Khan, N. G. Krishna et al.· 0 citations
Modality reliance in VLMs is not fixed, but varies across tasks, evidence structures, models, and evaluation settings, which shows that modality reliance in VLMs is not fixed, but varies across tasks, evidence structures, and evaluation settings.
CERES is proposed, a closed-loop multimodal indexing framework that builds a three-level semantic pyramid, mines implicit concepts via a co-occurrence-aware router, performs scale-routed cross-attention into a lightweight U-Net generator, and verifies coverage by re-indexing the generated image with the same frozen VLM...
Guang-Yuan Dong, Chuang Liu, Hao-Yu Wang et al.· 3 citations
Comparisons show that OCR specialization largely preserves head identity, retaining 17-20 of the top 20 heads per task with all-head rank correlations of 0.874-0.942, while redistributing their functional and causal strengths.
Yuan-Xiang Huangfu, Han-Meng Zhong, Linqing Chen et al.· 0 citations
Many vision applications ask several independent, forced-choice questions about the same image. Visual Jev encodes the image and public context once, executes isolated question suffixes as a batch, and reads candidate probabilities from the backbone's language-model head. Across four benchmarks, answer-supervised post-...
Guan-Xu Yu, Yu-Hang Yao· 14 citations· ⚡1
Related blog posts
MIT News · Artificial Intelligence· news.mit.eduOct 28, 2026
Professor Paris Smaragdis develops computers with superhuman hearing for applications like speech recognition, music understanding, and environmental monitoring.
Jennifer Neville did not want to go into computer science—but that’s exactly where she landed. Neville discusses the starts and stops that led to her professional sweet spot and her work identifying “surprising failures” making it hard for AI to handle complexity. The post What AI gets wrong and what failure teaches us appeared first on Microsoft Research.
Computer scientist, entrepreneur, and philanthropist will collaborate with the MIT Schwarzman College of Computing to advance AI and scientific discovery.
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.