mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

On the Role of Visual Grounding in VQA

arXiv 2406.18253 ↗First posted 26 Jun 2024cs.CVcited by 5

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Visual Grounding (VG) in VQA refers to a model's proclivity to infer answers based on question-relevant image regions. Conceptually, VG identifies as an axiomatic requirement of the VQA task. In practice, however, DNN-based VQA models are notorious for bypassing VG by way of shortcut (SC) learning without suffering obvious performance losses in standard benchmarks. To uncover the impact of SC learning, Out-of-Distribution (OOD) tests have been proposed that expose a lack of VG with low accuracy. These tests have since been at the center of VG research and served as basis for various investigations into VG's impact on accuracy. However, the role of VG in VQA still remains not fully understood and has not yet been properly formalized. In this work, we seek to clarify VG's role in VQA by formalizing it on a conceptual level. We propose a novel theoretical framework called "Visually Grounded Reasoning" (VGR) that uses the concepts of VG and Reasoning to describe VQA inference in ideal OOD testing. By consolidating fundamental insights into VG's role in VQA, VGR helps to reveal rampant VG-related SC exploitation in OOD testing, which explains why the relationship between VG and OOD accuracy has been difficult to define. Finally, we propose an approach to create OOD tests that properly emphasize a requirement for VG, and show how to improve performance on them.

Key facts. Cited by 5 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 41 of its 46 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 26 Jun 2024.

Builds on

41 of 46 references.

References · 41

  1. 2017Attention Is All You Needcited by 60,361
  2. 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,399
  3. 2015Faster R-CNN: Towards Real-Time Object Detection with Region Proposal Networkscited by 9,639
  4. 2016Grad-CAM: Visual Explanations from Deep Networks via Gradient-based Localizationcited by 6,733
  5. 2014Neural Machine Translation by Jointly Learning to Align and Translatecited by 4,548
  6. 2016Making the V in VQA Matter: Elevating the Role of Image Understanding in Visual Question Answeringcited by 2,516
  7. 2015VQA: Visual Question Answeringcited by 2,506
  8. 2020Shortcut Learning in Deep Neural Networkscited by 1,969
  9. 2019LXMERT: Learning Cross-Modality Encoder Representations from Transformerscited by 1,553
  10. 2016CLEVR: A Diagnostic Dataset for Compositional Language and Elementary Visual Reasoningcited by 1,457
  11. 2017Bottom-Up and Top-Down Attention for Image Captioning and Visual Question Answeringcited by 1,312
  12. 2020Towards Faithfully Interpretable NLP Systems: How should we define and evaluate faithfulness?cited by 599
29 more
  1. 2019ERASER: A Benchmark to Evaluate Rationalized NLP Modelscited by 530
  2. 2017Don't Just Assume; Look and Answer: Overcoming Priors for Visual Question Answeringcited by 339
  3. 2017Right for the Right Reasons: Training Differentiable Models by Constraining their Explanationscited by 294
  4. 2016Understanding Neural Networks through Representation Erasurecited by 224
  5. 2018Compositional Attention Networks for Machine Reasoningcited by 183
  6. 2019Taking a HINT: Leveraging Explanations to Make Vision and Language Models More Groundedcited by 128
  7. 2020Ground Truth Evaluation of Neural Network Explanations with CLEVR-XAIcited by 126
  8. 2016Analyzing the Behavior of Visual Question Answering Modelscited by 119
  9. 2019Learning by Abstraction: The Neural State Machinecited by 113
  10. 2016Human Attention in Visual Question Answering: Do Humans and Deep Networks Look at the Same Regions?cited by 111
  11. 2015Yin and Yang: Balancing and Answering Binary Visual Questionscited by 109
  12. 2020On the Value of Out-of-Distribution Testing: An Example of Goodhart's Lawcited by 74
  13. 2021Beyond Question-Based Biases: Assessing Multimodal Shortcut Learning in Visual Question Answeringcited by 71
  14. 2020Roses Are Red, Violets Are Blue... but Should Vqa Expect Them To?cited by 69
  15. 2020MUTANT: A Training Paradigm for Out-of-Distribution Generalization in Visual Question Answeringcited by 63
  16. 2019Self-Critical Reasoning for Robust Visual Question Answeringcited by 61
  17. 2022Grounding Answers for Visual Questions Asked by Visually Impaired Peoplecited by 47
  18. 2018Explicit Bias Discovery in Visual Question Answering Modelscited by 42
  19. 2019Meta Module Network for Compositional Visual Reasoningcited by 39
  20. 2022SwapMix: Diagnosing and Regularizing the Over-Reliance on Visual Context in Visual Question Answeringcited by 38
  21. 2020Neuro-Symbolic Visual Reasoning: Disentangling "Visual" from "Reasoning"cited by 35
  22. 2021Greedy Gradient Ensemble for Robust Visual Question Answeringcited by 34
  23. 2022Language Prior Is Not the Only Shortcut: A Benchmark for Shortcut Learning in VQAcited by 30
  24. 2021Found a Reason for me? Weakly-supervised Grounded Visual Question Answering using Capsulescited by 22
  25. 2021How Transferable are Reasoning Patterns in VQA?cited by 16
  26. 2022VisFIS: Visual Feature Importance Supervision with Right-for-the-Right-Reason Objectivescited by 12
  27. 2024Uncovering the Full Potential of Visual Grounding Methods in VQAcited by 9
  28. 2023Measuring Faithful and Plausible Visual Grounding in VQAcited by 8
  29. 2022Visually Grounded VQA by Lattice-based Retrievalcited by 3

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2024: 1; 2025: 2; 2026: 2.

5 papers.