mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Acquiring Linguistic Knowledge from Multimodal Input

arXiv 2402.17936 ↗First posted 27 Feb 2024cs.CLcited by 3

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

In contrast to children, language models (LMs) exhibit considerably inferior data efficiency when acquiring language. In this submission to the BabyLM Challenge (Warstadt et al., 2023), we test the hypothesis that this data efficiency gap is partly caused by a lack of multimodal input and grounding in the learning environment of typical language models. Although previous work looking into this question found that multimodal training can even harm language-only performance, we speculate that these findings can be attributed to catastrophic forgetting of complex language due to fine-tuning on captions data. To test our hypothesis, we perform an ablation study on FLAVA (Singh et al., 2022), a multimodal vision-and-language model, independently varying the volume of text and vision input to quantify how much text data (if any) can be offset by vision at different data scales. We aim to limit catastrophic forgetting through a multitask pretraining regime that includes unimodal text-only tasks and data sampled from WiT, the relatively diverse Wikipedia-based dataset (Srinivasan et al., 2021). Our results are largely negative: Multimodal pretraining does not harm our models' language performance but does not consistently help either. That said, our conclusions are limited by our having been able to conduct only a small number of runs. While we must leave open the possibility that multimodal input explains some of the gap in data efficiency between LMs and humans, positive evidence for this hypothesis will require better architectures and techniques for multimodal training.

Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 36 of its 57 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 27 Feb 2024.

Builds on

36 of 57 references.

References · 36

  1. 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,399
  2. 2021Learning Transferable Visual Models From Natural Language Supervisioncited by 33,744
  3. 2020An Image is Worth 16x16 Words: Transformers for Image Recognition at Scalecited by 30,186
  4. 2019RoBERTa: A Robustly Optimized BERT Pretraining Approachcited by 13,372
  5. 2014ImageNet Large Scale Visual Recognition Challengecited by 8,498
  6. 2018GLUE: A Multi-Task Benchmark and Analysis Platform for Natural Language Understandingcited by 4,899
  7. 2016Visual Genome: Connecting Language and Vision Using Crowdsourced Dense Image Annotationscited by 2,656
  8. 2019ViLBERT: Pretraining Task-Agnostic Visiolinguistic Representations for Vision-and-Language Taskscited by 2,222
  9. 2019SuperGLUE: A Stickier Benchmark for General-Purpose Language Understanding Systemscited by 1,729
  10. 2019LXMERT: Learning Cross-Modality Encoder Representations from Transformerscited by 1,553
  11. 2015Microsoft COCO Captions: Data Collection and Evaluation Servercited by 1,462
  12. 2019VisualBERT: A Simple and Performant Baseline for Vision and Languagecited by 1,296
24 more
  1. 2021FLAVA: A Foundational Language And Vision Alignment Modelcited by 649
  2. 2019BLiMP: The Benchmark of Linguistic Minimal Pairs for Englishcited by 564
  3. 2021Datasets: A Community Library for Natural Language Processingcited by 530
  4. 2019Unified Vision-Language Pre-Training for Image Captioning and VQAcited by 494
  5. 2019Unicoder-VL: A Universal Encoder for Vision and Language by Cross-modal Pre-trainingcited by 451
  6. 2019The Neuro-Symbolic Concept Learner: Interpreting Scenes, Words, and Sentences From Natural Supervisioncited by 372
  7. 2021WIT: Wikipedia-based Image Text Dataset for Multimodal Multilingual Machine Learningcited by 287
  8. 2018Targeted Syntactic Evaluation of Language Modelscited by 242
  9. 2020ERNIE-ViL: Knowledge Enhanced Vision-Language Representations Through Scene Graphcited by 211
  10. 2019BERT has a Mouth, and It Must Speak: BERT as a Markov Random Field Language Modelcited by 185
  11. 2020When Do You Need Billions of Words of Pretraining Data?cited by 104
  12. 2022What Artificial Neural Networks Can Tell Us About Human Language Acquisitioncited by 99
  13. 2019BERTs of a feather do not generalize together: Large variability in generalization across models with similar test set performancecited by 89
  14. 2021Vision-and-Language or Vision-for-Language? On Cross-Modal Influence in Multimodal Transformerscited by 72
  15. 2020Multimodal Pretraining Unmasked: A Meta-Analysis and a Unified Framework of Vision-and-Language BERTscited by 71
  16. 2021Does Vision-and-Language Pretraining Improve Lexical Grounding?cited by 25
  17. 2022VoLTA: Vision-Language Transformer with Weakly-Supervised Local-Feature Alignmentcited by 20
  18. 2021Effect of Visual Extensions on Natural Language Understanding in Vision-and-Language Modelscited by 18
  19. 2015Learning language through picturescited by 12
  20. 2020Language-Mediated, Object-Centric Representation Learningcited by 11
  21. 2023Is Multimodal Vision Supervision Beneficial to Language?cited by 6
  22. 2023Learning the meanings of function words from grounded language using a visual question answering modelcited by 6
  23. 2022Language with Vision: a Study on Grounded Word and Sentence Embeddingscited by 5
  24. 2018Word learning and the acquisition of syntactic--semantic overhypothesescited by 3

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 2; 2026: 1.

3 papers.