mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Uncovering the Full Potential of Visual Grounding Methods in VQA

arXiv 2401.07803 ↗First posted 15 Jan 2024cs.CVcited by 9

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Visual Grounding (VG) methods in Visual Question Answering (VQA) attempt to improve VQA performance by strengthening a model's reliance on question-relevant visual information. The presence of such relevant information in the visual input is typically assumed in training and testing. This assumption, however, is inherently flawed when dealing with imperfect image representations common in large-scale VQA, where the information carried by visual features frequently deviates from expected ground-truth contents. As a result, training and testing of VG-methods is performed with largely inaccurate data, which obstructs proper assessment of their potential benefits. In this study, we demonstrate that current evaluation schemes for VG-methods are problematic due to the flawed assumption of availability of relevant visual information. Our experiments show that these methods can be much more effective when evaluation conditions are corrected. Code is provided on GitHub.

Key facts. Cited by 9 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 20 of its 30 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 15 Jan 2024.

Builds on

20 of 30 references.

References · 20

  1. 2014Microsoft COCO: Common Objects in Contextcited by 17,608
  2. 2015Faster R-CNN: Towards Real-Time Object Detection with Region Proposal Networkscited by 9,639
  3. 2016Grad-CAM: Visual Explanations from Deep Networks via Gradient-based Localizationcited by 6,733
  4. 2016Making the V in VQA Matter: Elevating the Role of Image Understanding in Visual Question Answeringcited by 2,516
  5. 2015VQA: Visual Question Answeringcited by 2,506
  6. 2019LXMERT: Learning Cross-Modality Encoder Representations from Transformerscited by 1,553
  7. 2017Bottom-Up and Top-Down Attention for Image Captioning and Visual Question Answeringcited by 1,312
  8. 2017Don't Just Assume; Look and Answer: Overcoming Priors for Visual Question Answeringcited by 339
  9. 2018Multimodal Explanations: Justifying Decisions and Pointing to the Evidencecited by 179
  10. 2019Taking a HINT: Leveraging Explanations to Make Vision and Language Models More Groundedcited by 128
  11. 2020Ground Truth Evaluation of Neural Network Explanations with CLEVR-XAIcited by 126
  12. 2016Analyzing the Behavior of Visual Question Answering Modelscited by 119
8 more
  1. 2016Human Attention in Visual Question Answering: Do Humans and Deep Networks Look at the Same Regions?cited by 111
  2. 2020On the Value of Out-of-Distribution Testing: An Example of Goodhart's Lawcited by 74
  3. 2020MUTANT: A Training Paradigm for Out-of-Distribution Generalization in Visual Question Answeringcited by 63
  4. 2019Self-Critical Reasoning for Robust Visual Question Answeringcited by 61
  5. 2019Meta Module Network for Compositional Visual Reasoningcited by 39
  6. 2020Visual Grounding Methods for VQA are Working for the Wrong Reasons!cited by 18
  7. 2022VisFIS: Visual Feature Importance Supervision with Right-for-the-Right-Reason Objectivescited by 12
  8. 2023Measuring Faithful and Plausible Visual Grounding in VQAcited by 8

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2024: 3; 2025: 3; 2026: 3.

9 papers.