Does VLM Classification Benefit from LLM Description Semantics?
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Accurately describing images with text is a foundation of explainable AI. Vision-Language Models (VLMs) like CLIP have recently addressed this by aligning images and texts in a shared embedding space, expressing semantic similarities between vision and language embeddings. VLM classification can be improved with descriptions generated by Large Language Models (LLMs). However, it is difficult to determine the contribution of actual description semantics, as the performance gain may also stem from a semantic-agnostic ensembling effect, where multiple modified text prompts act as a noisy test-time augmentation for the original one. We propose an alternative evaluation scenario to decide if a performance boost of LLM-generated descriptions is caused by such a noise augmentation effect or rather by genuine description semantics. The proposed scenario avoids noisy test-time augmentation and ensures that genuine, distinctive descriptions cause the performance boost. Furthermore, we propose a training-free method for selecting discriminative descriptions that work independently of classname-ensembling effects. Our approach identifies descriptions that effectively differentiate classes within a local CLIP label neighborhood, improving classification accuracy across seven datasets. Additionally, we provide insights into the explainability of description-based image classification with VLMs.
Key facts. Cited by 6 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 26 of its 38 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 16 Dec 2024.
Builds on
26 of 38 references.
References · 26
- 2017Attention Is All You Needcited by 60,361
- 2021Learning Transferable Visual Models From Natural Language Supervisioncited by 33,744
- 2020An Image is Worth 16x16 Words: Transformers for Image Recognition at Scalecited by 30,186
- 2014Microsoft COCO: Common Objects in Contextcited by 17,608
- 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,971
- 2023Llama 2: Open Foundation and Fine-Tuned Chat Modelscited by 13,028
- 2014Going Deeper with Convolutionscited by 4,241
- 2021Scaling Up Visual and Vision-Language Representation Learning With Noisy Text Supervisioncited by 3,864
- 2021Align before Fuse: Vision and Language Representation Learning with Momentum Distillationcited by 1,619
- 2019Do ImageNet Classifiers Generalize to ImageNet?cited by 1,515
- 2019Certified Adversarial Robustness via Randomized Smoothingcited by 1,340
- 2019VisualBERT: A Simple and Performant Baseline for Vision and Languagecited by 1,296
14 more
- 2023Vision-Language Models for Vision Tasks: A Surveycited by 839
- 2021A Survey of Data Augmentation Approaches for NLPcited by 409
- 2022Language in a Bottle: Language Model Guided Concept Bottlenecks for Interpretable Image Classificationcited by 312
- 2023What does CLIP know about a red circle? Visual prompt engineering for VLMscited by 218
- 2018Contextual Augmentation: Data Augmentation by Words with Paradigmatic Relationscited by 201
- 2020MixText: Linguistically-Informed Interpolation of Hidden Space for Semi-Supervised Text Classificationcited by 187
- 2023Waffling around for Performance: Visual Classification with Random Words and Broad Conceptscited by 101
- 2023Learning Concise and Descriptive Attributes for Visual Recognitioncited by 73
- 2022MixGen: A New Multi-Modal Data Augmentationcited by 61
- 2024Pre-trained Vision-Language Models Learn Discoverable Visual Conceptscited by 16
- 2023Follow-Up Differential Descriptions: Language Models Resolve Ambiguities for Image Classificationcited by 13
- 2021To Augment or Not to Augment? A Comparative Study on Text Augmentation Techniques for Low-Resource NLPcited by 12
- 2023Text Descriptions are Compressive and Invariant Representations for Visual Learningcited by 7
- 2023Images in Language Space: Exploring the Suitability of Large Language Models for Vision & Language Taskscited by 5
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 3; 2026: 3.
6 papers.
- 2025RAVENEA: A Benchmark for Multimodal Retrieval-Augmented Visual Culture Understandingcited by 9
- 2025Top-Down Compression: Revisit Efficient Vision Token Projection for Visual Instruction Tuningcited by 3
- 2026Extraction and Analysis of Multimodal Concepts in Vision Language Models through Sparse Autoencoderscited by 2
- 2025Towards Robust Visual Continual Learning with Multi-Prototype Supervisioncited by 1
- 2026Explaining, Verifying, and Aligning Semantic Hierarchies in Vision-Language Model Embeddingscited by 0
- 2026Latent Cluster Analysis for Vision-Language-Action Modelscited by 0
- 2026Latent Cluster Analysis for Vision-Language-Action Models2 Sep 2026
- 2026Extraction and Analysis of Multimodal Concepts in Vision Language Models through Sparse Autoencoders19 Jun 2026
- 2026Explaining, Verifying, and Aligning Semantic Hierarchies in Vision-Language Model Embeddings26 Mar 2026
- 2025Towards Robust Visual Continual Learning with Multi-Prototype Supervision19 Sep 2025
- 2025RAVENEA: A Benchmark for Multimodal Retrieval-Augmented Visual Culture Understanding20 May 2025
- 2025Top-Down Compression: Revisit Efficient Vision Token Projection for Visual Instruction Tuning17 May 2025
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2023LLMs as Visual Explainers: Advancing Image Classification with Evolving Visual Descriptions
- 2024Rethinking VLMs and LLMs for Image Classification
- 2022Visual Classification via Description from Large Language Models
- 2024Can Better Text Semantics in Prompt Tuning Improve VLM Generalization?
- 2024Why are Visually-Grounded Language Models Bad at Image Classification?
- 2024If CLIP Could Talk: Understanding Vision-Language Model Representations Through Their Preferred Concept Descriptions
- 2024Unified Generative and Discriminative Training for Multi-modal Large Language Models
- 2024How Well Can Vision Language Models See Image Details?