Do Vision-and-Language Transformers Learn Grounded Predicate-Noun Dependencies?
Mitja Nikolaus, Emmanuelle Salin, Stéphane Ayache, Abdellah Fourtassi, Benoît Favre
Abstract
Recent advances in vision-and-language modeling have seen the development of Transformer architectures that achieve remarkable performance on multimodal reasoning tasks. Yet, the exact capabilities of these black-box models are still poorly understood. While much of previous work has focused on studying their ability to learn meaning at the word-level, their ability to track syntactic dependencies between words has received less attention. We take a first step in closing this gap by creating a new multimodal task targeted at evaluating understanding of predicate-noun dependencies in a controlled setup. We evaluate a range of state-of-the-art models and find that their performance on the task varies considerably, with some models performing relatively well and others at chance level. In an effort to explain this variability, our analyses indicate that the quality (and not only sheer quantity) of pretraining data is essential. Additionally, the best performing models leverage fine-grained multimodal pretraining objectives in addition to the standard image-text matching objectives. This study highlights that targeted and controlled evaluations are a crucial step for a precise and rigorous test of the multimodal knowledge of vision-and-language models.
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.
Cited by top-tier papers4
- Measuring Progress in Fine-grained Vision-and-Language UnderstandingEmanuele Bugliarello, Laurent Sartran, Aishwarya Agrawal, Lisa Anne Hendricks et al.ACL 2023 · 9 citations
- MASS: Overcoming Language Bias in Image-Text MatchingJiwan Chung, Seungwon Lim, Sangkyu Lee, Youngjae YuAAAI 2025 · 1 citation
- Weakly-Supervised Learning of Visual Relations in Multimodal PretrainingEmanuele Bugliarello, Aida Nematzadeh, Lisa Anne HendricksEMNLP 2023 · 1 citation
- Extract Free Dense Misalignment from CLIPJeongYeon Nam, Jinbae Im, Wonjae Kim, Taeho KilAAAI 2025
Builds on9
- ViLT: Vision-and-Language Transformer Without Convolution or Region SupervisionWonjae Kim, Bokyung Son, Ildoo KimICML 2021 · 2,258 citations
- Winoground: Probing Vision and Language Models for Visio-Linguistic CompositionalityTristan Thrush, Ryan Jiang, Max Bartolo, Amanpreet Singh et al.CVPR 2022 · 179 citations
- Harms of Gender Exclusivity and Challenges in Non-Binary Representation in Language TechnologiesSunipa Dev, Masoud Monajatipoor, Anaelia Ovalle, Arjun Subramonian et al.EMNLP 2021 · 113 citations
- Visually Grounded Reasoning across Languages and CulturesFangyu Liu, Emanuele Bugliarello, Edoardo Maria Ponti, Siva Reddy et al.EMNLP 2021 · 87 citations
- Language (Technology) is Power: A Critical Survey of "Bias" in NLPSu Lin Blodgett, Solon Barocas, Hal Daumé III, Hanna M. WallachACL 2020 · 68 citations
Related papers
- Probing Inter-modality: Visual Parsing with Self-Attention for Vision-and-Language Pre-trainingHongwei Xue, Yupan Huang, Bei Liu, Houwen Peng et al.NeurIPS 2021 · 100 citations
- Multi-modal Data Spectrum: Multi-modal Datasets are Multi-dimensionalDivyam Madaan, Varshan Muhunthan, Kyunghyun Cho, Sumit ChopraICLR 2026 · 3 citations
- Do Vision-Language Transformers Exhibit Visual Commonsense? An Empirical Study of VCRZhenyang Li, Yangyang Guo, Kejie Wang, Xiaolin Chen et al.ACM MM 2023 · 11 citations
- Are Vision-Language Transformers Learning Multimodal Representations? A Probing PerspectiveEmmanuelle Salin, Badreddine Farah, Stéphane Ayache, Benoît FavreAAAI 2022 · 49 citations
- Investigating Compositional Challenges in Vision-Language Models for Visual GroundingYunan Zeng, Yan Huang, Jinjin Zhang, Zequn Jie et al.CVPR 2024 · 4 citations
