Dual Adapter Tuning of Vision–Language Models Using Large Language Models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Vision-language models (VLMs) pre-trained on large-scale image-text pairs have shown impressive results in zero-shot vision tasks. Knowledge transferability of these models can be further improved with the help of a limited number of samples. Feature adapter tuning is a prominent approach employed for efficient transfer learning (ETL). However, most of the previous ETL models focus on tuning either prior-independent or prior-dependent feature adapters. We propose a novel ETL approach that leverages both adapter styles simultaneously. Additionally, most existing ETL models rely on using textual prompts constructed by completing general pre-defined templates. This approach neglects the descriptive knowledge that can assist VLM by presenting an informative prompt. Instead of pre-defined templates for prompt construction, we use a pre-trained LLM to generate attribute-specific prompts for each visual category. Furthermore, we guide the VLM with context-aware discriminative information generated by the pre-trained LLM to emphasize features that distinguish the most probable candidate classes. The proposed ETL model is evaluated on 11 datasets and sets a new state of the art. Our code and all collected prompts are publicly available at https://github.com/mrzarei5/DATViL.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.004 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".