mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Interpreting the structure of multi-object representations in vision encoders

arXiv 2406.09067 ↗First posted 13 Jun 2024cs.CV cs.CL q-bio.NCcited by 1

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

In this work, we interpret the representations of multi-object scenes in vision encoders through the lens of structured representations. Structured representations allow modeling of individual objects distinctly and their flexible use based on the task context for both scene-level and object-specific tasks. These capabilities play a central role in human reasoning and generalization, allowing us to abstract away irrelevant details and focus on relevant information in a compact and usable form. We define structured representations as those that adhere to two specific properties: binding specific object information into discrete representation units and segregating object representations into separate sets of tokens to minimize cross-object entanglement. Based on these properties, we evaluated and compared image encoders pre-trained on classification (ViT), large vision-language models (CLIP, BLIP, FLAVA), and self-supervised methods (DINO, DINOv2). We examine the token representations by creating object-decoding tasks that measure the ability of specific tokens to capture individual objects in multi-object scenes from the COCO dataset. This analysis provides insights into how object-wise representations are distributed across tokens and layers within these vision encoders. Our findings highlight significant differences in the representation of objects depending on their relevance to the pre-training objective, with this effect particularly pronounced in the CLS token (often used for downstream tasks). Meanwhile, networks and layers that exhibit more structured representations retain better information about individual objects. To guide practical applications, we propose formal measures to quantify the two properties of structured representations, aiding in selecting and adapting vision encoders for downstream tasks.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 30 of its 42 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 13 Jun 2024.

Builds on

30 of 42 references.

References · 30

  1. 2021Learning Transferable Visual Models From Natural Language Supervisioncited by 33,456
  2. 2014Microsoft COCO: Common Objects in Contextcited by 17,498
  3. 2023DINOv2: Learning Robust Visual Features without Supervisioncited by 7,764
  4. 2021Emerging Properties in Self-Supervised Vision Transformerscited by 6,893
  5. 2017Neural Discrete Representation Learningcited by 4,650
  6. 2022BLIP: Bootstrapping Language-Image Pre-training for Unified Vision-Language Understanding and Generationcited by 4,310
  7. 2016Visual Genome: Connecting Language and Vision Using Crowdsourced Dense Image Annotationscited by 2,646
  8. 2015VQA: Visual Question Answeringcited by 2,489
  9. 2016CLEVR: A Diagnostic Dataset for Compositional Language and Elementary Visual Reasoningcited by 1,445
  10. 2016Understanding intermediate layers using linear classifier probescited by 1,279
  11. 2021Geometric Deep Learning: Grids, Groups, Graphs, Geodesics, and Gaugescited by 1,131
  12. 2020Concept Bottleneck Modelscited by 1,022
18 more
  1. 2020Object-Centric Learning with Slot Attentioncited by 865
  2. 2021Do Vision Transformers See Like Convolutional Neural Networks?cited by 671
  3. 2021FLAVA: A Foundational Language And Vision Alignment Modelcited by 646
  4. 2021CLIPort: What and Where Pathways for Robotic Manipulationcited by 617
  5. 2019Designing and Interpreting Probes with Control Taskscited by 608
  6. 2022When and why vision-language models behave like bags-of-words, and what to do about it?cited by 603
  7. 2022Mask DINO: Towards A Unified Transformer-based Framework for Object Detection and Segmentationcited by 341
  8. 2018Neural-Symbolic VQA: Disentangling Reasoning from Vision and Language Understandingcited by 304
  9. 2019On the Relationship between Self-Attention and Convolutional Layerscited by 299
  10. 2020On the Binding Problem in Artificial Neural Networkscited by 230
  11. 2022Does CLIP Bind Concepts? Probing Compositionality in Large Image Modelscited by 101
  12. 2020Behind the Scene: Revealing the Secrets of Pre-trained Vision-and-Language Modelscited by 90
  13. 2022VL-InterpreT: An Interactive Visualization Tool for Interpreting Vision-Language Transformerscited by 53
  14. 2023Break It Down: Evidence for Structural Compositionality in Neural Networkscited by 44
  15. 2022Do Vision-Language Pretrained Models Learn Composable Primitive Concepts?cited by 31
  16. 2022Unit Testing for Concepts in Neural Networkscited by 23
  17. 2022Discrete Key-Value Bottleneckcited by 18
  18. 2024DINOv2 based Self Supervised Learning For Few Shot Medical Image Segmentationcited by 11

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.

1 paper.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2025Perception Encoder: The best visual embeddings are not at the output of the network
  2. 2023Structure-CLIP: Towards Scene Graph Knowledge to Enhance Multi-modal Structured Representations
  3. 2026Contextual inference from single objects in Vision-Language models
  4. 2026Do Vision Language Models Need to Process Image Tokens?
  5. 2024Understanding the Effect of using Semantically Meaningful Tokens for Visual Representation Learning
  6. 2022Perceptual Grouping in Contrastive Vision-Language Models
  7. 2025DIP: Unsupervised Dense In-Context Post-training of Visual Representations
  8. 2026Beyond Encoder Accumulation: Measuring Encoder Roles in Multi-Encoder VLMs