Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

BBA: Bi-Modal Behavioral Alignment for Reasoning with Large Vision-Language Models

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 2402.13577 v1 pith:YXZXJYE5 submitted 2024-02-21 cs.CL

classification cs.CL
keywords reasoningmethodmodelsrepresentationsunderlinevisualaddressingchains
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
abstract

Multimodal reasoning stands as a pivotal capability for large vision-language models (LVLMs). The integration with Domain-Specific Languages (DSL), offering precise visual representations, equips these models with the opportunity to execute more accurate reasoning in complex and professional domains. However, the vanilla Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting method faces challenges in effectively leveraging the unique strengths of visual and DSL representations, primarily due to their differing reasoning mechanisms. Additionally, it often falls short in addressing critical steps in multi-step reasoning tasks. To mitigate these challenges, we introduce the \underline{B}i-Modal \underline{B}ehavioral \underline{A}lignment (BBA) prompting method, designed to maximize the potential of DSL in augmenting complex multi-modal reasoning tasks. This method initiates by guiding LVLMs to create separate reasoning chains for visual and DSL representations. Subsequently, it aligns these chains by addressing any inconsistencies, thus achieving a cohesive integration of behaviors from different modalities. Our experiments demonstrate that BBA substantially improves the performance of GPT-4V(ision) on geometry problem solving ($28.34\% \to 34.22\%$), chess positional advantage prediction ($42.08\% \to 46.99\%$) and molecular property prediction ($77.47\% \to 83.52\%$).

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. Explainability for Vision Foundation Models: A Survey

    cs.CV 2025-01 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    A structured review of 122 papers on explainability for vision foundation models, with a taxonomy and the finding that quantitative evaluation is rare (36%).

Pith tools