mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

How Much Data Is Enough? Uniform Convergence Bounds for Generative & Vision-Language Models under Low-Dimensional Structure

arXiv 2512.23109 ↗First posted 28 Dec 2025cs.LG cs.AI stat.MLcited by 0

On the map: Multimodal LLMs / vision-language models → VLM benchmarks and visual reasoning

Abstract (arXiv)

Modern generative and vision-language models (VLMs) are increasingly used in scientific and medical decision support, where predicted probabilities must be both accurate and well calibrated. Despite strong empirical results with moderate data, it remains unclear when such predictions generalize uniformly across inputs, classes, or subpopulations, rather than only on average-a critical issue in biomedicine, where rare conditions and specific groups can exhibit large errors even when overall loss is low. We study this question from a finite-sample perspective and ask: under what structural assumptions can generative and VLM-based predictors achieve uniformly accurate and calibrated behavior with practical sample sizes? Rather than analyzing arbitrary parameterizations, we focus on induced families of classifiers obtained by varying prompts or semantic embeddings within a restricted representation space. When model outputs depend smoothly on a low-dimensional semantic representation-an assumption supported by spectral structure in text and joint image-text embeddings-classical uniform convergence tools yield meaningful non-asymptotic guarantees. Our main results give finite-sample uniform convergence bounds for accuracy and calibration functionals of VLM-induced classifiers under Lipschitz stability with respect to prompt embeddings. The implied sample complexity depends on intrinsic/effective dimension, not ambient embedding dimension, and we further derive spectrum-dependent bounds that make explicit how eigenvalue decay governs data requirements. We conclude with implications for data-limited biomedical modeling, including when current dataset sizes can support uniformly reliable predictions and why average calibration metrics may miss worst-case miscalibration.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in VLM benchmarks and visual reasoning, one of 16 directions in Multimodal LLMs / vision-language models. Builds on 9 of its 19 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 28 Dec 2025.

Builds on

9 of 19 references.

References · 9

  1. 2021Learning Transferable Visual Models From Natural Language Supervisioncited by 33,456
  2. 2017On Calibration of Modern Neural Networkscited by 4,860
  3. 2022MedCLIP: Contrastive Learning from Unpaired Medical Images and Textcited by 564
  4. 2020What is being transferred in transfer learning?cited by 365
  5. 2022Making the Most of Text Semantics to Improve Biomedical Vision--Language Processingcited by 336
  6. 2019Verified Uncertainty Calibrationcited by 307
  7. 2019Evaluating model calibration in classificationcited by 165
  8. 2019Generalization Guarantees for Neural Networks via Harnessing the Low-rank Structure of the Jacobiancited by 67
  9. 2019Generalization Bounds For Unsupervised and Semi-Supervised Learning With Autoencoderscited by 11

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026BioVLM: Routing Prompts, Not Parameters, for Cross-Modality Generalization in Biomedical VLMs
  2. 2025Exploiting the Asymmetric Uncertainty Structure of Pre-trained VLMs on the Unit Hypersphere
  3. 202620/20 Vision Language Models: A Prescription for Better VLMs through Data Curation Alone
  4. 2025Concentration bounds on response-based vector embeddings of black-box generative models
  5. 2025Trust the Model: Compact VLMs as In-Context Judges for Image-Text Data Quality
  6. 2025Test-Time Consistency in Vision Language Models
  7. 2026DataComp-VLM: Improved Open Datasets for Vision-Language Models
  8. 2024Probabilistic Language-Image Pre-Training