mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

How and where does CLIP process negation?

arXiv 2407.10488 ↗First posted 15 Jul 2024cs.CL cs.AIcited by 16

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Various benchmarks have been proposed to test linguistic understanding in pre-trained vision & language (VL) models. Here we build on the existence task from the VALSE benchmark (Parcalabescu et al, 2022) which we use to test models' understanding of negation, a particularly interesting issue for multimodal models. However, while such VL benchmarks are useful for measuring model performance, they do not reveal anything about the internal processes through which these models arrive at their outputs in such visio-linguistic tasks. We take inspiration from the growing literature on model interpretability to explain the behaviour of VL models on the understanding of negation. Specifically, we approach these questions through an in-depth analysis of the text encoder in CLIP (Radford et al, 2021), a highly influential VL model. We localise parts of the encoder that process negation and analyse the role of attention heads in this task. Our contributions are threefold. We demonstrate how methods from the language model interpretability literature (such as causal tracing) can be translated to multimodal models and tasks; we provide concrete insights into how CLIP processes negation on the VALSE existence task; and we highlight inherent limitations in the VALSE dataset as a benchmark for linguistic understanding.

Key facts. Cited by 16 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 43 of its 58 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 15 Jul 2024.

Builds on

43 of 58 references.

References · 43

  1. 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,204
  2. 2021Learning Transferable Visual Models From Natural Language Supervisioncited by 33,456
  3. 2021High-Resolution Image Synthesis with Latent Diffusion Modelscited by 18,694
  4. 2022Hierarchical Text-Conditional Image Generation with CLIP Latentscited by 6,539
  5. 2022BLIP: Bootstrapping Language-Image Pre-training for Unified Vision-Language Understanding and Generationcited by 4,310
  6. 2021Scaling Up Visual and Vision-Language Representation Learning With Noisy Text Supervisioncited by 3,848
  7. 2022Locating and Editing Factual Associations in GPTcited by 2,609
  8. 2019ViLBERT: Pretraining Task-Agnostic Visiolinguistic Representations for Vision-and-Language Taskscited by 2,219
  9. 2021Align before Fuse: Vision and Language Representation Learning with Momentum Distillationcited by 1,612
  10. 2019VisualBERT: A Simple and Performant Baseline for Vision and Languagecited by 1,291
  11. 2022Interpretability in the Wild: a Circuit for Indirect Object Identification in GPT-2 smallcited by 1,130
  12. 2019What Does BERT Look At? An Analysis of BERT's Attentioncited by 994
31 more
  1. 2021FLAVA: A Foundational Language And Vision Alignment Modelcited by 646
  2. 2022When and why vision-language models behave like bags-of-words, and what to do about it?cited by 603
  3. 2021ClipCap: CLIP Prefix for Image Captioningcited by 557
  4. 2022Winoground: Probing Vision and Language Models for Visio-Linguistic Compositionalitycited by 523
  5. 2021Image Segmentation Using Text and Image Promptscited by 509
  6. 2019Revealing the Dark Secrets of BERTcited by 300
  7. 2021Multi-Grained Vision Language Pre-Training: Aligning Texts with Visual Conceptscited by 255
  8. 2023What's "up" with vision-language models? Investigating their struggle with spatial reasoningcited by 245
  9. 2019Analyzing the Structure of Attention in a Transformer Language Modelcited by 241
  10. 2023Does Localization Inform Editing? Surprising Differences in Causality-Based Localization vs. Knowledge Editing in Language Modelscited by 237
  11. 2017All-but-the-Top: Simple and Effective Postprocessing for Word Representationscited by 205
  12. 2021VALSE: A Task-Independent Benchmark for Vision and Language Models Centered on Linguistic Phenomenacited by 134
  13. 2021Probing Image-Language Transformers for Verb Understandingcited by 109
  14. 2020Neuron Shapley: Discovering the Responsible Neuronscited by 98
  15. 2020Are Neural Nets Modular? Inspecting Functional Modularity Through Differentiable Weight Maskscited by 97
  16. 2017FOIL it! Find One mismatch between Image and Language captioncited by 95
  17. 2023Language models are not naysayers: An analysis of language models on negation benchmarkscited by 73
  18. 2020Multimodal Pretraining Unmasked: A Meta-Analysis and a Unified Framework of Vision-and-Language BERTscited by 71
  19. 2021Vision-and-Language or Vision-for-Language? On Cross-Modal Influence in Multimodal Transformerscited by 71
  20. 2022VLMbench: A Compositional Benchmark for Vision-and-Language Manipulationcited by 68
  21. 2023Detecting Edit Failures In Large Language Models: An Improved Specificity Benchmarkcited by 62
  22. 2020Does my multimodal model learn cross-modal interactions? It's harder to tell than you might think!cited by 61
  23. 2022MM-SHAP: A Performance-agnostic Metric for Measuring Multimodal Contributions in Vision and Language Models & Taskscited by 42
  24. 2020Words aren't enough, their order matters: On the Robustness of Grounding Visual Referring Expressionscited by 33
  25. 2018Revisiting the Importance of Individual Units in CNNs via Ablationcited by 32
  26. 2023ViLMA: A Zero-Shot Benchmark for Linguistic and Temporal Grounding in Video-Language Modelscited by 26
  27. 2023Measuring Progress in Fine-grained Vision-and-Language Understandingcited by 25
  28. 2023This is not correct! Negation-aware Evaluation of Language Generation Systemscited by 16
  29. 2022Contrastive Visual Semantic Pretraining Magnifies the Semantics of Natural Language Representationscited by 14
  30. 2018Defoiling Foiled Image Captionscited by 9
  31. 2023The BLA Benchmark: Investigating Basic Language Abilities of Pre-Trained Multimodal Modelscited by 8

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2024: 3; 2025: 7; 2026: 6.

16 papers.

Sort:

By area: