Seeing What's Not There: Negation Understanding Needs More Than Training
Bhuvan Aggarwal, Amit More, Mudit Soni, Srinivasa Divakar Bhat
Abstract
Understanding the negation in a sentence is an important part of compositional understanding and logic in natural language. Many practical AI applications, such as autonomous driving, include precise instruction with negations. For example, following instruction to an AI assistant ”locate a parking spot without a vehicle” requires the assistant to not confuse between presence and absence of vehicles. Al- though joint embedding-based Vision Language Models (VLMs) like CLIP have revolutionized multi-modal tasks, they struggle to interpret negation. To address this limitation, recently many works proposed to solve the problem through a data- centric approach by introducing additional datasets with hard-negative samples for both image and text data. Contrary to these approaches, we present a zero-shot approach to tackle the negation understanding problem. We probe the properties of CLIP text embeddings and show that they follow compositional arithmetic op- erations, which allow the addition or removal of semantic information directly in the embedding space. We then present a rule-based approach to extract negated text from given caption and then use it to explicitly remove corresponding se- mantic information from original embedding, improving negation understanding in VLMs. Our approach does not require expensive training process to induce negation understanding into the model, and achieves the state-of-the-art perfor- mance on popular benchmark for negation understanding. We improve baseline CLIP model performance on NegBench from 25.5% to 67.0% for MCQ and from 50.9% to 56.1% for retrieval tasks. Even NegCLIP model which is fine-tuned on negtion datasets, our approach boosts its MCQ accuracy from 54.03% to 66.22% and retrieval accuracy from 59.25% to 60.1% showing strong performance.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext 7b22a689-428b-47c2-a274-5ce963722ab8Builds on20
- Learning Transferable Visual Models From Natural Language SupervisionAlec Radford, Jong Wook Kim, Chris Hallacy, Aditya Ramesh et al.ICML 2021 · 47,906 citations
- High-Resolution Image Synthesis with Latent Diffusion ModelsRobin Rombach, Andreas Blattmann, Dominik Lorenz, Patrick Esser et al.CVPR 2022 · 13,123 citations
- BLIP: Bootstrapping Language-Image Pre-training for Unified Vision-Language Understanding and GenerationJunnan Li, Dongxu Li, Caiming Xiong, Steven C. H. HoiICML 2022 · 6,549 citations
- Zero-Shot Text-to-Image GenerationAditya Ramesh, Mikhail Pavlov, Gabriel Goh, Scott Gray et al.ICML 2021 · 6,356 citations
- Image Segmentation Using Text and Image PromptsTimo Lüddecke, Alexander S. EckerCVPR 2022 · 457 citations
Related papers
- Vision-Language Models Do Not Understand NegationKumail Alhamoud, Shaden Alshammari, Yonglong Tian, Guohao Li et al.CVPR 2025
- Know "No" Better: A Data-Driven Approach for Enhancing Negation Awareness in CLIPJunsung Park, Jungbeom Lee, Jongyoon Song, Sangwon Yu et al.ICCV 2025 · 6 citations
- Not Just What's There: Enabling CLIP to Comprehend Negated Visual Descriptions Without Fine-TuningJunhao Xiao, Zhiyu Wu, Hao Lin, Yi Chen et al.AAAI 2026 · 4 citations
- Logic Unseen: Revealing the Logical Blindspots of Vision-Language ModelsYuchen Zhou, Jiayu Tang, Shuo Yang, Xiaoyan Xiao et al.AAAI 2026 · 2 citations
- Teaching CLIP to Count to TenRoni Paiss, Ariel Ephrat, Omer Tov, Shiran Zada et al.ICCV 2023 · 196 citations
