Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Substance or Style: What Does Your Image Embedding Know?

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 2307.05610 v1 pith:5VKP32J4 submitted 2023-07-10 cs.LG cs.AIcs.CV

classification cs.LGcs.AIcs.CV
keywords embeddingsmodelsinformationbetterimagenon-semanticstyletransformations
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

Probes are small networks that predict properties of underlying data from embeddings, and they provide a targeted, effective way to illuminate the information contained in embeddings. While analysis through the use of probes has become standard in NLP, there has been much less exploration in vision. Image foundation models have primarily been evaluated for semantic content. Better understanding the non-semantic information in popular embeddings (e.g., MAE, SimCLR, or CLIP) will shed new light both on the training algorithms and on the uses for these foundation models. We design a systematic transformation prediction task and measure the visual content of embeddings along many axes, including image style, quality, and a range of natural and artificial transformations. Surprisingly, six embeddings (including SimCLR) encode enough non-semantic information to identify dozens of transformations. We also consider a generalization task, where we group similar transformations and hold out several for testing. We find that image-text models (CLIP and ALIGN) are better at recognizing new examples of style transfer than masking-based models (CAN and MAE). Overall, our results suggest that the choice of pre-training algorithm impacts the types of information in the embedding, and certain models are better than others for non-semantic downstream tasks.

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. Pencils to Pixels: A Systematic Study of Creative Drawings across Children, Adults and AI

    cs.HC 2025-02 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A new dataset and computational framework quantify style and content in children's, adults', and DALL-E drawings, showing that expert and automated creativity scores disagree across groups.

Pith tools