MILES: Modality-Informed Learning Rate Scheduler for Balancing Multimodal Learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of multimodal neural networks is to combine diverse data sources, referred to as modalities, to achieve enhanced performance compared to relying on a single modality. However, training of multimodal networks is typically hindered by modality overfitting, where the network relies excessively on one of the available modalities. This often yields sub-optimal performance, hindering the potential of multimodal learning and resulting in marginal improvements relative to unimodal models. In this work, we present the Modality-Informed Learning ratE Scheduler (MILES) for training multimodal joint fusion models in a balanced manner. MILES leverages the differences in modality-wise conditional utilization rates during training to effectively balance multimodal learning. The learning rate is dynamically adjusted during training to balance the speed of learning from each modality by the multimodal model, aiming for enhanced performance in both multimodal and unimodal predictions. We extensively evaluate MILES on four multimodal joint fusion tasks and compare its performance to seven state-of-the-art baselines. Our results show that MILES outperforms all baselines across all tasks and fusion methods considered in our study, effectively balancing modality usage during training. This results in improved multimodal performance and stronger modality encoders, which can be leveraged when dealing with unimodal samples or absent modalities. Overall, our work highlights the impact of balancing multimodal learning on improving model performance.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".