pith. sign in

arxiv: 2607.00434 · v1 · pith:L243ZI6Mnew · submitted 2026-07-01 · 💻 cs.CV · cs.LG

Information-Regularized Attention for Visual-Centric Reasoning

Guohao Sun , Xiaofang Wang , Yash Patel , Mengchen Liu , Zhiqiang Tao , Praveen Krishnan This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-07-02 15:10 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.CV cs.LG
keywords vision-language modelsstochastic attentioninformation regularizationvisual groundingobject hallucinationattention sinktransformer layersrepresentation stability
0
0 comments X

The pith

Information-Regularized Attention controls visual information flow to stabilize representations in vision-language models.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

Vision-language models suffer from object hallucination, weak grounding, and catastrophic forgetting because visual embeddings receive no explicit control during standard next-token prediction and end up optimized passively. The paper introduces Information-Regularized Attention, a stochastic attention mechanism that adds local noise to regulate how much visual information reaches hidden states at intermediate layers. This produces smoother curvature trajectories in embeddings and suppresses attention-sink across every layer. If the claim holds, stochastic attention functions as an active driver of representation learning rather than a side-effect regularizer, offering a direct lever for more reliable multimodal generation.

Core claim

IRA is a stochastic attention mechanism that explicitly regulates the amount of visual information injected into the hidden states of intermediate transformer layers. This local reparameterization translates uncertainty about visual representations into local noise independent across data points, yielding smoother curvature trajectories and suppressed attention-sink across all layers.

What carries the argument

Information-Regularized Attention (IRA), a stochastic attention mechanism that regulates visual information injection into transformer hidden states via local noise.

If this is right

  • Object hallucination and weak visual grounding decrease because visual signals are actively regulated rather than passively optimized.
  • Smoother curvature trajectories appear in embedding space, indicating more stable transformation of visual input across layers.
  • Attention-sink is suppressed at every transformer layer instead of accumulating in later stages.
  • Stochastic attention becomes a contributor to representation learning in generative models rather than a mere regularizer.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same local-noise control could be tested in pure language models to check whether intermediate-layer regulation improves stability without visual input.
  • Explicit information regulation at each layer may reduce the need for separate post-training fixes for catastrophic forgetting.
  • The method suggests attention can be reframed as an active information valve rather than a passive weighting operation.

Load-bearing premise

Failures such as object hallucination and weak grounding in vision-language models arise from a lack of explicit control over visual representation learning under the standard next-token prediction objective.

What would settle it

A controlled experiment in which IRA is added to a baseline VLM yet produces no measurable reduction in attention-sink or no smoother curvature trajectories on the same training data would falsify the claimed mechanism.

read the original abstract

Vision-language models (VLMs) have become a paradigm for multimodal learning, yet remain unstable due to object hallucination, weak visual grounding, and catastrophic forgetting after full-parameter instruction tuning. We claim these failures result from a lack of explicit control over visual representation learning during the standard next-token prediction objective. As a result, visual embeddings thus become passively optimized and prone to injecting redundant or spurious signals. To counter this, we introduce Information-Regularized Attention (IRA), a stochastic attention mechanism that explicitly regulates the amount of visual information injected into the hidden states of intermediate transformer layers. This local reparameterization translates uncertainty about visual representations into local noise that is independent across data points. Beyond evaluating model performance, we also quantify embedding properties, where IRA produces smoother curvature trajectories and suppresses attention-sink across all layers, indicating a more stable transformation of the visual signal. Our results suggest that stochastic attention is not merely a regularizer but a key contributor to representation learning in a generative architecture, offering a new direction for building more reliable VLMs.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The paper claims that object hallucination, weak visual grounding, and catastrophic forgetting in VLMs arise from passive optimization of visual embeddings under the standard next-token prediction objective. It introduces Information-Regularized Attention (IRA), a stochastic attention mechanism using local reparameterization to explicitly regulate the amount of visual information injected into intermediate transformer hidden states. IRA is reported to yield smoother curvature trajectories and suppress attention-sink across layers, with the conclusion that stochastic attention is a key contributor to representation learning rather than a mere regularizer.

Significance. If the causal claims and empirical links hold, IRA could offer a new direction for stabilizing VLMs by treating stochasticity as an explicit control mechanism in visual representation learning, with potential benefits for reliability in multimodal generative models.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: The premise that the three listed failure modes 'result from a lack of explicit control over visual representation learning during the standard next-token prediction objective' is asserted without derivation, prior-work citation, or benchmark establishing the causal link; this premise is load-bearing for the motivation of IRA.
  2. [Abstract] Abstract: The reported outcomes (smoother curvature trajectories, attention-sink suppression) are presented as evidence of 'more stable transformation of the visual signal,' yet no ablation, correlation analysis, or direct measurement connecting these geometric properties to reductions in hallucination, grounding, or forgetting is described, leaving the central claim that stochastic attention is a 'key contributor' unsupported.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: The phrase 'our results suggest' is used without any accompanying quantitative metrics, datasets, baselines, or statistical details.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive feedback highlighting areas where the abstract's claims require stronger grounding. We address each major comment below and will revise the abstract and supporting sections accordingly to improve clarity and evidential support without altering the core technical contributions.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: The premise that the three listed failure modes 'result from a lack of explicit control over visual representation learning during the standard next-token prediction objective' is asserted without derivation, prior-work citation, or benchmark establishing the causal link; this premise is load-bearing for the motivation of IRA.

    Authors: We acknowledge the abstract presents this as a direct claim. The full manuscript motivates it from established observations in VLM literature on how next-token prediction can lead to passive visual embedding optimization (e.g., via attention dilution and spurious correlations). To address the concern, we will revise the abstract to include 2-3 key citations from prior work on hallucination and grounding, plus a one-sentence derivation linking the objective to lack of explicit control. This strengthens the motivation without requiring new experiments. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: The reported outcomes (smoother curvature trajectories, attention-sink suppression) are presented as evidence of 'more stable transformation of the visual signal,' yet no ablation, correlation analysis, or direct measurement connecting these geometric properties to reductions in hallucination, grounding, or forgetting is described, leaving the central claim that stochastic attention is a 'key contributor' unsupported.

    Authors: The manuscript reports both the geometric metrics and task-level improvements under IRA, positioning the former as indicators of stability. We agree a direct correlation or ablation tying curvature/sink changes specifically to hallucination reductions is absent. In revision we will add a brief correlation analysis (e.g., across layers or runs) in the results or appendix to quantify the link, while preserving the existing empirical results. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; claims rest on assertion and empirical reporting rather than self-referential reduction

full rationale

The paper asserts without derivation that VLM failures arise from passive visual optimization under next-token prediction, introduces IRA to supply explicit control, and reports geometric metrics (smoother curvature, attention-sink suppression) as evidence of stable transformation. No equations, fitted parameters renamed as predictions, or self-citation chains appear in the provided text that would reduce any load-bearing claim to its own inputs by construction. The interpretive leap linking metrics to the three failure modes is a correctness or evidential concern, not a circularity pattern under the enumerated criteria.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Review performed on abstract only; no equations, methods, or results available to identify free parameters, axioms, or invented entities.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5721 in / 1040 out tokens · 24601 ms · 2026-07-02T15:10:39.069728+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

28 extracted references · 18 canonical work pages · 13 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Understanding intermediate layers using linear classifier probes

    Guillaume Alain and Yoshua Bengio. Understanding intermediate layers using linear classifier probes.arXiv preprint arXiv:1610.01644,

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  2. [2]

    Qwen Technical Report

    Jinze Bai, Shuai Bai, Yunfei Chu, Zeyu Cui, Kai Dang, Xiaodong Deng, Yang Fan, Wenbin Ge, Yu Han, Fei Huang, et al. Qwen technical report.arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.16609,

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  3. [3]

    Why do llms attend to the first token?arXiv preprint arXiv:2504.02732,

    Federico Barbero, Alvaro Arroyo, Xiangming Gu, Christos Perivolaropoulos, Michael Bronstein, Petar Veličković, and Razvan Pascanu. Why do llms attend to the first token?arXiv preprint arXiv:2504.02732,

    work page arXiv

  4. [4]

    Eliciting Latent Predictions from Transformers with the Tuned Lens

    Nora Belrose, Zach Furman, Logan Smith, Danny Halawi, Igor Ostrovsky, Lev McKinney, Stella Biderman, and Jacob Steinhardt. Eliciting latent predictions from transformers with the tuned lens.arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.08112,

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  5. [5]

    Are we on the right way for evaluating large vision-language models? InThe Thirty-eighth Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, 2024a

    Lin Chen, Jinsong Li, Xiaoyi Dong, Pan Zhang, Yuhang Zang, Zehui Chen, Haodong Duan, Jiaqi Wang, Yu Qiao, Dahua Lin, and Feng Zhao. Are we on the right way for evaluating large vision-language models? InThe Thirty-eighth Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, 2024a. Sanyuan Chen, Yutai Hou, Yiming Cui, Wanxiang Che, Ting Liu, and Xian...

    2020

  6. [6]

    Hosseini and Evelina Fedorenko

    Eghbal A. Hosseini and Evelina Fedorenko. Large language models implicitly learn to straighten neural sentence trajectories to construct a predictive representation of natural language. InThirty-seventh Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, 2023.https://openreview.net/forum?id=h3lTrt4Ftb. Jingjing Jiang, Ziyi Liu, and Nanning Zheng. Correla...

    2023

  7. [7]

    See what you are told: Visual attention sink in large multimodal models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.03321,

    Seil Kang, Jinyeong Kim, Junhyeok Kim, and Seong Jae Hwang. See what you are told: Visual attention sink in large multimodal models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.03321,

    work page arXiv

  8. [8]

    Reinforced attention learning.arXiv preprint arXiv:2602.04884,

    Bangzheng Li, Jianmo Ni, Chen Qu, Ian Miao, Liu Yang, Xingyu Fu, Muhao Chen, and Derek Zhiyuan Cheng. Reinforced attention learning.arXiv preprint arXiv:2602.04884,

    work page arXiv

  9. [9]

    LLaVA-OneVision: Easy Visual Task Transfer

    Bo Li, Yuanhan Zhang, Dong Guo, Renrui Zhang, Feng Li, Hao Zhang, Kaichen Zhang, Peiyuan Zhang, Yanwei Li, Ziwei Liu, et al. Llava-onevision: Easy visual task transfer.arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.03326, 2024a. Junnan Li, Dongxu Li, Silvio Savarese, and Steven Hoi. Blip-2: Bootstrapping language-image pre-training with frozen image encoders and large languag...

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  10. [10]

    Attention guided alignment in efficient vision-language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2511.17793,

    Shweta Mahajan, Hoang Le, Hyojin Park, Farzad Farhadzadeh, Munawar Hayat, and Fatih Porikli. Attention guided alignment in efficient vision-language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2511.17793,

    work page arXiv

  11. [11]

    ChartQA: A benchmark for question answering about charts with visual and logical reasoning

    13 Ahmed Masry, Xuan Long Do, Jia Qing Tan, Shafiq Joty, and Enamul Hoque. ChartQA: A benchmark for question answering about charts with visual and logical reasoning. InFindings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL 2022,

    2022

  12. [12]

    Analyzing noise in autoencoders and deep networks

    Ben Poole, Jascha Sohl-Dickstein, and Surya Ganguli. Analyzing noise in autoencoders and deep networks.arXiv preprint arXiv:1406.1831,

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  13. [13]

    Vision language models are blind.ArXiv, abs/2407.06581, 2024

    Pooyan Rahmanzadehgervi, Logan Bolton, Mohammad Reza Taesiri, and Anh Totti Nguyen. Vision language models are blind: Failing to translate detailed visual features into words.arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.06581,

    work page arXiv

  14. [14]

    Object hallucination in image captioning

    Anna Rohrbach, Lisa Anne Hendricks, Kaylee Burns, Trevor Darrell, and Kate Saenko. Object hallucination in image captioning. InProceedings of the 2018 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing,

    2018

  15. [15]

    Proximal Policy Optimization Algorithms

    John Schulman, Filip Wolski, Prafulla Dhariwal, Alec Radford, and Oleg Klimov. Proximal policy optimization algorithms.arXiv preprint arXiv:1707.06347,

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  16. [16]

    Layer by Layer: Uncovering Hidden Representations in Language Models

    Oscar Skean, Md Rifat Arefin, Dan Zhao, Niket Patel, Jalal Naghiyev, Yann LeCun, and Ravid Shwartz-Ziv. Layer by layer: Uncovering hidden representations in language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2502.02013,

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  17. [17]

    Where Vision Becomes Text: Locating the OCR Routing Bottleneck in Vision-Language Models

    Jonathan Steinberg and Oren Gal. Where vision becomes text: Locating the ocr routing bottleneck in vision-language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2602.22918,

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  18. [18]

    Massive Activations in Large Language Models

    Guohao Sun, Can Qin, Huazhu Fu, Linwei Wang, and Zhiqiang Tao. Self-training large language and vision assistant for medical question answering. InProceedings of the 2024 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, November 2024a. Guohao Sun, Can Qin, Jiamian Wang, Zeyuan Chen, Ran Xu, and Zhiqiang Tao. Sq-llava: Self-questioning for l...

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  19. [19]

    Vision Language Models are Biased

    An Vo, Khai-Nguyen Nguyen, Mohammad Reza Taesiri, Vy Tuong Dang, Anh Totti Nguyen, and Daeyoung Kim. Vision language models are biased.arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.23941,

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  20. [20]

    The bottom-up evolution of representations in the transformer: A study with machine translation and language modeling objectives

    Elena Voita, Rico Sennrich, and Ivan Titov. The bottom-up evolution of representations in the transformer: A study with machine translation and language modeling objectives. InProceedings of the 2019 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing and the 9th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing (EMNLP-IJCNLP),

    2019

  21. [21]

    Rossi, Lina Yao, Jingbo Shang, and Julian McAuley

    Junda Wu, Yuxin Xiong, Xintong Li, Yu Xia, Ruoyu Wang, Yu Wang, Tong Yu, Sungchul Kim, Ryan A. Rossi, Lina Yao, Jingbo Shang, and Julian McAuley. Mitigating visual knowledge forgetting in MLLM instruction-tuning via modality-decoupled gradient descent. InFindings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2025, November

    2025

  22. [22]

    Efficient Streaming Language Models with Attention Sinks

    Guangxuan Xiao, Ji Lin, Mickael Seznec, Hao Wu, Julien Demouth, and Song Han. Smoothquant: Accurate and efficient post-training quantization for large language models. InInternational conference on machine learning, pages 38087–38099. PMLR, 2023a. Guangxuan Xiao, Yuandong Tian, Beidi Chen, Song Han, and Mike Lewis. Efficient streaming language models with...

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  23. [23]

    Mmmu: A massive multi-discipline multimodal understanding and reasoning benchmark for expert agi.2024 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR),

    Xiang Yue, Yuansheng Ni, Kai Zhang, Tianyu Zheng, Ruoqi Liu, Ge Zhang, Samuel Stevens, Dongfu Jiang, Weiming Ren, Yuxuan Sun, Cong Wei, Botao Yu, Ruibin Yuan, Renliang Sun, Ming Yin, Boyuan Zheng, Zhenzhu Yang, Yibo Liu, Wenhao Huang, Huan Sun, Yu Su, and Wenhu Chen. Mmmu: A massive multi-discipline multimodal understanding and reasoning benchmark for exp...

    2024

  24. [24]

    VIB-Probe: Detecting and Mitigating Hallucinations in Vision-Language Models via Variational Information Bottleneck

    Feiran Zhang, Yixin Wu, Zhenghua Wang, Xiaohua Wang, Changze Lv, Xuanjing Huang, and Xiaoqing Zheng. Vib-probe: Detecting and mitigating hallucinations in vision-language models via variational information bottleneck. arXiv preprint arXiv:2601.05547,

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  25. [25]

    MME-RealWorld: Could Your Multimodal LLM Challenge High-Resolution Real-World Scenarios that are Difficult for Humans?

    Yi-Fan Zhang, Huanyu Zhang, Haochen Tian, Chaoyou Fu, Shuangqing Zhang, Junfei Wu, Feng Li, Kun Wang, Qingsong Wen, Zhang Zhang, et al. Mme-realworld: Could your multimodal llm challenge high-resolution real-world scenarios that are difficult for humans?arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.13257,

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  26. [26]

    Mitigating hallucination in large vision-language models through aligning attention distribution to information flow

    Jianfei Zhao, Feng Zhang, Xin Sun, and Chong Feng. Mitigating hallucination in large vision-language models through aligning attention distribution to information flow. InFindings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2025,

    2025

  27. [27]

    By projecting token-level attention maps into pixel space, we can evaluate the accuracy of attention allocation against the ‘ground-truth’ attention map using the Soft Dice metric

    16 Appendix A Analysis A.1 Correlation Between Model Attention and Prediction To examine the relationship between visual attention accuracy and performance, we conduct experiments on datasets that provide bounding-box annotations indicating the locations of answer-relevant objects. By projecting token-level attention maps into pixel space, we can evaluate...

    2016

  28. [28]

    Provide a short description for this region

    Empirically, we have observed a correlation between the number of IRA layers andβmax. Specifically, inserting more IRA layers into a pretrained VLM requires a largerβmax with more warm-up steps. A.4 Limitation Due to resource constraints, we apply the proposed methods to models up to 8B parameters, but we expect the conclusions to hold for larger models w...

    2016