Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Do Vision Transformers See Like Convolutional Neural Networks?

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2108.08810 v2 pith:XMZVLXKT submitted 2021-08-19 cs.CV cs.AIcs.LGstat.ML

classification cs.CVcs.AIcs.LGstat.ML
keywords classificationconvolutionalnetworksvisionarchitecturescnnsconnectionsdifferences
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Convolutional neural networks (CNNs) have so far been the de-facto model for visual data. Recent work has shown that (Vision) Transformer models (ViT) can achieve comparable or even superior performance on image classification tasks. This raises a central question: how are Vision Transformers solving these tasks? Are they acting like convolutional networks, or learning entirely different visual representations? Analyzing the internal representation structure of ViTs and CNNs on image classification benchmarks, we find striking differences between the two architectures, such as ViT having more uniform representations across all layers. We explore how these differences arise, finding crucial roles played by self-attention, which enables early aggregation of global information, and ViT residual connections, which strongly propagate features from lower to higher layers. We study the ramifications for spatial localization, demonstrating ViTs successfully preserve input spatial information, with noticeable effects from different classification methods. Finally, we study the effect of (pretraining) dataset scale on intermediate features and transfer learning, and conclude with a discussion on connections to new architectures such as the MLP-Mixer.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Revisiting Simple Baselines for In-The-Wild Deepfake Detection

    cs.CV 2025-09 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    Finetuned CLIP-pretrained ConvNeXt-base and ViT-b32 classifiers reach 81% accuracy on Deepfake-Eval-2024, within noise of the leading commercial detector's 82%.

Pith tools