# CAST: Cross-modal Alignment Similarity Test for Vision Language Models

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2409.11007 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2409.11007/

## Key facts

- Cited by 1 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in MLLM training and visual instruction tuning, one of 16 directions in Multimodal LLMs / vision-language models.
- Builds on 20 of its 29 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 17 Sep 2024.

## Placed in

- Multimodal LLMs / vision-language models / [MLLM training and visual instruction tuning](https://mlsanity.com/mllm/mllm-training-and-visual-instruction-tuning/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 20 of 20)

- [Learning Transferable Visual Models From Natural Language Supervision](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2103.00020/) (2021)
- [The Llama 3 Herd of Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.21783/) (2024)
- [Improved Baselines with Visual Instruction Tuning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.03744/) (2023)
- [Sigmoid Loss for Language Image Pre-Training](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.15343/) (2023)
- [InternVL: Scaling up Vision Foundation Models and Aligning for Generic Visual-Linguistic Tasks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2312.14238/) (2023)
- [MMMU: A Massive Multi-discipline Multimodal Understanding and Reasoning Benchmark for Expert AGI](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.16502/) (2023)
- [Phi-3 Technical Report: A Highly Capable Language Model Locally on Your Phone](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.14219/) (2024)
- [MiniCPM-V: A GPT-4V Level MLLM on Your Phone](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2408.01800/) (2024)
- [Vision-Language Models for Vision Tasks: A Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.00685/) (2023)
- [Quantifying Language Models' Sensitivity to Spurious Features in Prompt Design or: How I learned to start worrying about prompt formatting](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.11324/) (2023)
- [Measuring and Improving Consistency in Pretrained Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2102.01017/) (2021)
- [INSIDE: LLMs' Internal States Retain the Power of Hallucination Detection](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.03744/) (2024)
- [DOCCI: Descriptions of Connected and Contrasting Images](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.19753/) (2024)
- [RLAIF-V: Open-Source AI Feedback Leads to Super GPT-4V Trustworthiness](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.17220/) (2024)
- [Efficient Multimodal Learning from Data-centric Perspective](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.11530/) (2024)
- [Masked Vision and Language Modeling for Multi-modal Representation Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2208.02131/) (2022)
- [Benchmarking Multi-Image Understanding in Vision and Language Models: Perception, Knowledge, Reasoning, and Multi-Hop Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.12742/) (2024)
- [Describing Differences in Image Sets with Natural Language](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2312.02974/) (2023)
- [Do Vision & Language Decoders use Images and Text equally? How Self-consistent are their Explanations?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.18624/) (2024)
- [Decompose and Compare Consistency: Measuring VLMs' Answer Reliability via Task-Decomposition Consistency Comparison](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.07840/) (2024)

## Built on by (most cited first, 1 of 1)

- [Critic-V: VLM Critics Help Catch VLM Errors in Multimodal Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2411.18203/) (2024)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Vision Language Models (VLMs) are typically evaluated with Visual Question Answering (VQA) tasks which assess a model's understanding of scenes. Good VQA performance is taken as evidence that the model will perform well on a broader range of tasks that require both visual and language inputs. However, scene-aware VQA does not fully capture input biases or assess hallucinations caused by a misalignment between modalities. To address this, we propose a Cross-modal Alignment Similarity Test (CAST) to probe VLMs for self-consistency across modalities. This test involves asking the models to identify similarities between two scenes through text-only, image-only, or both and then assess the truthfulness of the similarities they generate. Since there is no ground-truth to compare against, this evaluation does not focus on objective accuracy but rather on whether VLMs are internally consistent in their outputs. We argue that while not all self-consistent models are capable or accurate, all capable VLMs must be self-consistent.