mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Which Negatives Matter? Ask Your Text Encoder: Adaptive Similarity Margins for Dense-Caption Retrieval

arXiv 2608.18521 ↗First posted 19 Aug 2026cs.AI cs.LGcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Dense-caption retrieval has recently been improved by introducing segmentation, edge maps, LLM-filtered captions, and cross-modal modules into contrastive fine-tuning. However, these methods largely inherit the same InfoNCE objective, whose optimization can prematurely saturate under a strong pre-trained initialization: on dense captions, the loss falls below 10^-3 on 80% of batches within the first epoch, while its gradient becomes numerically zero in 47% of measurements. We find that this behavior is closely related to the large number of near-duplicate captions in dense-caption benchmarks, where a few highly similar negatives remain unresolved after the easy majority has already been separated. As a remedy, we introduce HN-CLIP, which uses the text encoder's own text-text geometry to construct per-negative adaptive similarity margins. Specifically, a detached caption-similarity matrix is added to the negative logits, assigning larger margins to more similar captions without mining, synthesizing, or resampling negatives. The resulting objective requires only one caption-similarity matrix and a masked logit addition during training, with no auxiliary data, additional parameters, offline preprocessing, or inference-time overhead. Extensive experiments on four dense-caption retrieval benchmarks show that HN-CLIP improves over the strongest competitors by +2.5 to +4.0 R@1 while training 2.4x faster than GOAL and 5.4x faster than StructXLIP. Moreover, the proposed objective improves all six tested fine-tuning frameworks on the in-domain benchmarks and reaches the strongest full-data baseline with only 20% of the training data.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 39 of its 42 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 19 Aug 2026.

Builds on

39 of 42 references.

References · 39

  1. 2021Learning Transferable Visual Models From Natural Language Supervisioncited by 33,456
  2. 2021LoRA: Low-Rank Adaptation of Large Language Modelscited by 14,084
  3. 2020A Simple Framework for Contrastive Learning of Visual Representationscited by 11,979
  4. 2018Representation Learning with Contrastive Predictive Codingcited by 7,662
  5. 2019Momentum Contrast for Unsupervised Visual Representation Learningcited by 7,482
  6. 2021Scaling Up Visual and Vision-Language Representation Learning With Noisy Text Supervisioncited by 3,848
  7. 2023Sigmoid Loss for Language Image Pre-Trainingcited by 3,048
  8. 2015FaceNet: A Unified Embedding for Face Recognition and Clusteringcited by 2,833
  9. 2020Supervised Contrastive Learningcited by 2,803
  10. 2020Understanding Contrastive Representation Learning through Alignment and Uniformity on the Hyperspherecited by 1,393
  11. 2020ColBERT: Efficient and Effective Passage Search via Contextualized Late Interaction over BERTcited by 1,160
  12. 2023ShareGPT4V: Improving Large Multi-Modal Models with Better Captionscited by 1,000
27 more
  1. 2018CosFace: Large Margin Cosine Loss for Deep Face Recognitioncited by 968
  2. 2024DoRA: Weight-Decomposed Low-Rank Adaptationcited by 740
  3. 2021FILIP: Fine-grained Interactive Language-Image Pre-Trainingcited by 626
  4. 2020Contrastive Learning with Hard Negative Samplescited by 619
  5. 2022When and why vision-language models behave like bags-of-words, and what to do about it?cited by 603
  6. 2022Winoground: Probing Vision and Language Models for Visio-Linguistic Compositionalitycited by 523
  7. 2020Hard Negative Mixing for Contrastive Learningcited by 399
  8. 2020Understanding the Behaviour of Contrastive Losscited by 397
  9. 2022AdaFace: Quality Adaptive Margin for Face Recognitioncited by 390
  10. 2024Long-CLIP: Unlocking the Long-Text Capability of CLIPcited by 298
  11. 2020Gradient Starvation: A Learning Proclivity in Neural Networkscited by 262
  12. 2023SugarCrepe: Fixing Hackable Benchmarks for Vision-Language Compositionalitycited by 238
  13. 2023Improving CLIP Training with Language Rewritescited by 216
  14. 2024DOCCI: Descriptions of Connected and Contrasting Imagescited by 130
  15. 2023A Picture is Worth More Than 77 Text Tokens: Evaluating CLIP-Style Models on Dense Captionscited by 107
  16. 2016A Hierarchical Approach for Generating Descriptive Image Paragraphscited by 104
  17. 2023Filtering, Distillation, and Hard Negatives for Vision-Language Pre-Trainingcited by 91
  18. 2024DreamLIP: Language-Image Pre-training with Long Captionscited by 72
  19. 2024ImageInWords: Unlocking Hyper-Detailed Image Descriptionscited by 56
  20. 2024LoTLIP: Improving Language-Image Pre-training for Long Text Understandingcited by 27
  21. 2025FineLIP: Extending CLIP's Reach via Fine-Grained Alignment with Longer Text Inputscited by 23
  22. 2024TULIP: Token-length Upgraded CLIPcited by 18
  23. 2025GOAL: Global-local Object Alignment Learningcited by 17
  24. 2025SmartCLIP: Modular Vision-language Alignment with Identification Guaranteescited by 14
  25. 2023Your Negative May not Be True Negative: Boosting Image-Text Matching with False Negative Eliminationcited by 10
  26. 2023MAFA: Managing False Negatives for Vision-Language Pre-trainingcited by 9
  27. 2026StructXLIP: Enhancing Vision-language Models with Multimodal Structural Cuescited by 1

Built on by

Not cited yet.