MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6929312590 · doi:10.48448/4qk5-9r55

Training-free Deep Concept Injection Enables Language Models for Video Question Answering

2024· other· en· W6929312590 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueUnderline Science Inc. · 2024
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCrossmodalQuestion answeringConstruct (python library)EmbeddingRepresentation (politics)Projection (relational algebra)Adaptation (eye)Component (thermodynamics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recently, enabling pretrained language models (PLMs) to perform zero-shot crossmodal tasks such as video question answering has been extensively studied. A popular approach is to learn a projection network that projects visual features into the input text embedding space of a PLM, as well as feed-forward adaptation layers, with the weights of the PLM frozen. However, is it really necessary to learn such additional layers? In this paper, we make the first attempt to demonstrate that the PLM is able to perform zero-shot crossmodal tasks without any crossmodal pretraining, when the observed visual concepts are injected as both additional input text tokens and augmentation in the intermediate features within each feed-forward network for the PLM. Specifically, inputting observed visual concepts as text tokens helps to inject them through the self-attention layers in the PLM; to augment the intermediate features in a way that is compatible with the PLM, we propose to construct adaptation layers based on the intermediate representation of concepts (obtained by solely inputting them to the PLM). These two complementary injection mechanisms form the proposed Deep Concept Injection, which comprehensively enables the PLM to perceive instantly without crossmodal pretraining. Extensive empirical analysis on zero-shot video question answering, as well as visual question answering, shows Deep Concept Injection achieves competitive or even better results in both zero-shot and fine-tuning settings, compared to state-of-the-art methods that require crossmodal pretraining.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.039
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.287 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUnderline Science Inc.French-language works237,207