How can embedding models bind concepts?
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Humans easily determine which color belongs to which shape in multi-object scenes, an ability known as concept binding. Vision-language embedding models such as CLIP struggle with binding: they recognize individual concepts but fail to represent which concepts form which objects. Although CLIP behaves like a bag-of-concepts model in cross-modal retrieval, object information is recoverable from its image and text embeddings separately. We study this tension through the binding function, which maps concepts to scene embeddings. We find that scene embeddings decompose additively into object representations, explaining why uni-modal probes can recover object information. However, CLIP's binding function is high-complexity, which likely prevents the image and text encoders from learning a shared binding mechanism that generalizes to unseen concept combinations. We then ask whether this limitation is fundamental. We show that it is not. In controlled transformer models trained from scratch, binding generalization emerges with sufficient data coverage. These models learn low-complexity binding functions characterized by multiplicative interactions between concepts, enabling systematic generalization. Code is publicly available at https://github.com/oshapio/binding-concepts-complexity.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 40 of its 48 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 29 May 2026.
Builds on
40 of 48 references.
References · 40
- 2021Learning Transferable Visual Models From Natural Language Supervisioncited by 33,744
- 2017Decoupled Weight Decay Regularizationcited by 1,831
- 2016CLEVR: A Diagnostic Dataset for Compositional Language and Elementary Visual Reasoningcited by 1,457
- 2024Eyes Wide Shut? Exploring the Visual Shortcomings of Multimodal LLMscited by 735
- 2023The Linear Representation Hypothesis and the Geometry of Large Language Modelscited by 716
- 2022When and why vision-language models behave like bags-of-words, and what to do about it?cited by 610
- 2023SugarCrepe: Fixing Hackable Benchmarks for Vision-Language Compositionalitycited by 243
- 2020On the Binding Problem in Artificial Neural Networkscited by 233
- 2022CREPE: Can Vision-Language Foundation Models Reason Compositionally?cited by 181
- 2023How do Language Models Bind Entities in Context?cited by 108
- 2022Does CLIP Bind Concepts? Probing Compositionality in Large Image Modelscited by 102
- 2023Compositional Abilities Emerge Multiplicatively: Exploring Diffusion Models on a Synthetic Taskcited by 93
28 more
- 2024On the Origins of Linear Representations in Large Language Modelscited by 79
- 2024Understanding the Limits of Vision Language Models Through the Lens of the Binding Problemcited by 75
- 2018The Description Length of Deep Learning Modelscited by 72
- 2020On the Transfer of Disentangled Representations in Realistic Settingscited by 63
- 2021Visual Representation Learning Does Not Generalize Strongly Within the Same Domaincited by 61
- 2025Deep Learning is Not So Mysterious or Differentcited by 56
- 2023Linear Spaces of Meanings: Compositional Structures in Vision-Language Modelscited by 48
- 2024Monitoring Latent World States in Language Models with Propositional Probescited by 43
- 2023Mass-Producing Failures of Multimodal Systems with Language Modelscited by 36
- 2025Straight to Zero: Why Linearly Decaying the Learning Rate to Zero Works Best for LLMscited by 35
- 2023Text encoders bottleneck compositionality in contrastive vision-language modelscited by 34
- 2025CLIP Behaves like a Bag-of-Words Model Cross-modally but not Uni-modallycited by 31
- 2022When are Lemons Purple? The Concept Association Bias of Vision-Language Modelscited by 23
- 2025Is CLIP ideal? No. Can we fix it? Yes!cited by 21
- 2024When does compositional structure yield compositional generalization? A kernel theorycited by 20
- 2025Does Object Binding Naturally Emerge in Large Pretrained Vision Transformers?cited by 19
- 2024On The Specialization of Neural Modulescited by 14
- 2024Deciphering the Role of Representation Disentanglement: Investigating Compositional Generalization in CLIP Modelscited by 13
- 2025Visual symbolic mechanisms: Emergent symbol processing in vision language modelscited by 13
- 2025Does Data Scaling Lead to Visual Compositional Generalization?cited by 13
- 2024Exploring How Generative MLLMs Perceive More Than CLIP with the Same Vision Encodercited by 11
- 2025When and How Does CLIP Enable Domain and Compositional Generalization?cited by 9
- 2025Not Only Text: Exploring Compositionality of Visual Representations in Vision-Language Modelscited by 8
- 2024Understanding Simplicity Bias towards Compositional Mappings via Learning Dynamicscited by 5
- 2024Enhancing Compositional Generalization via Compositional Feature Alignmentcited by 4
- 2025Common Data Properties Limit Object-Attribute Binding in CLIPcited by 4
- 2026Compositional Generalization Requires Linear, Orthogonal Representations in Vision Embedding Modelscited by 2
- 2026When Do Diffusion Models learn to Generate Multiple Objects?cited by 1
Built on by
Not cited yet.