When Does Geometric View Synthesis Help Wine Label Retrieval? A Public One-Shot Benchmark Across Self-Supervised and Vision-Language Backbones
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Geometric view synthesis can expand a single wine-label photograph into a training set, but its value with pretrained image encoders is unclear. We study this on a public WineSensed-derived benchmark of 1,000 classes, one enrollment photograph per class, and 4,295 real queries. With the earlier DINO vision transformer (ViT-S/16) recipe, geometric views raise top-1 accuracy from 34.1% to 62.6-63.7%, about three times the gain from two-dimensional (2D) augmentation. Frozen SigLIP 2-B already reaches 94.7%. A linear head over its frozen features gains 1.2-1.3 percentage points with the two geometric pipelines localized by the Segment Anything Model (SAM), while the other pipelines gain an inconclusive 0.3-0.6 points. Low-rank adaptation (LoRA) and validation-selected full fine-tuning show no clear gain within the reported confidence intervals; fixed-budget full fine-tuning loses 9-24 points. SAM localization supplies all six views for 99% of sources, compared with 43% for the edge-based front end. Recognition differences between the two cylinder constructions depend on the training recipe and are confounded by their crop and canvas conventions. Rendered-cylinder tests show different responses to source tilt, but an uncalibrated rim-ratio proxy establishes no corresponding trend in recognition on real photographs. An author-confirmed audit of 50 residual errors identifies 21 query-enrollment appearance mismatches, without establishing an irreducible error rate. These results support geometric synthesis for the tested self-supervised recipe and a smaller benefit through frozen-feature adaptation of the text-supervised encoder.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 17 of its 27 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 27 Sep 2026.
Builds on
17 of 27 references.
References · 17
- 2023Segment Anythingcited by 8,234
- 2023DINOv2: Learning Robust Visual Features without Supervisioncited by 7,974
- 2021Emerging Properties in Self-Supervised Vision Transformerscited by 6,968
- 2023Grounding DINO: Marrying DINO with Grounded Pre-Training for Open-Set Object Detectioncited by 3,332
- 2017Billion-scale similarity search with GPUscited by 2,497
- 2017SuperPoint: Self-Supervised Interest Point Detection and Descriptioncited by 1,320
- 2025SigLIP 2: Multilingual Vision-Language Encoders with Improved Semantic Understanding, Localization, and Dense Featurescited by 1,188
- 2021LoFTR: Detector-Free Local Feature Matching with Transformerscited by 984
- 2023LightGlue: Local Feature Matching at Light Speedcited by 590
- 2025ILIAS: Instance-Level Image retrieval At Scalecited by 30
- 2024AMES: Asymmetric and Memory-Efficient Similarity Estimation for Instance-level Retrievalcited by 16
- 2020Multi-Modal Reasoning Graph for Scene-Text Based Fine-Grained Image Classification and Retrievalcited by 10
5 more
- 2017Integrating Scene Text and Visual Appearance for Fine-Grained Image Classificationcited by 9
- 2020Fine-grained Image Classification and Retrieval by Combining Visual and Locally Pooled Textual Featurescited by 6
- 2023Learning to Taste: A Multimodal Wine Datasetcited by 6
- 2019Domain invariant hierarchical embedding for grocery products recognitioncited by 5
- 2026Bridging the Catalog-to-Real Gap: Scalable Product Recognition via Multi-Stage Contrastive Learningcited by 1
Built on by
Not cited yet.