InvGC: Robust Cross-Modal Retrieval by Inverse Graph Convolution
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Over recent decades, significant advancements in cross-modal retrieval is mainly driven by breakthroughs in visual and linguistic modeling. However, a recent study shows that multi-modal data representations tend to cluster within a limited convex cone (as representation degeneration problem), which hinders retrieval performance due to the inseparability of these representations. In our study, we first empirically validate the presence of the representation degeneration problem across multiple cross-modal benchmarks and methods. Next, to address it, we introduce a novel method, called InvGC, a post-processing technique inspired by graph convolution and average pooling. Specifically, InvGC defines the graph topology within the datasets and then applies graph convolution in a subtractive manner. This method effectively separates representations by increasing the distances between data points. To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of InvGC, we propose an advanced graph topology, LocalAdj, which only aims to increase the distances between each data point and its nearest neighbors. To understand why InvGC works, we present a detailed theoretical analysis, proving that the lower bound of recall will be improved after deploying InvGC. Extensive empirical results show that InvGC and InvGC w/LocalAdj significantly mitigate the representation degeneration problem, thereby enhancing retrieval 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 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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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".