Vision-language retrieval with CLIP-style dual encoders achieves strong cross-modal performance, yet practical accuracy often hinges on localized semantic distinctions where top-ranked near misses differ from the true match by a single critical detail. Hard-sample mining can select confusable candidates but cannot construct corrected counterparts; synthetic augmentation can generate novel samples but, without conditioning on actual model failures, targets irrelevant dimensions of hardness. We observe that a top-ranked false positive is a counterfactual scaffold---sharing most of the query's semantics while differing in a localized failure-causing residual. Minimally correcting this residual yields a hard positive of the ground truth in the same modality; the corrected and unedited versions form a hard negative pair that straddles the decision boundary, producing complementary pull--push supervision. We introduce RePair, guided by three principles---Validity, Minimality, and Locality---which mines false positives bidirectionally, applies LLM-guided counterfactual editing, and trains with a local hard-pair contrastive objective. On Flickr30K and COCO30K, RePair outperforms controlled augmentation baselines with only 107K synthetic samples---26\%--75\% fewer than comparable methods---confirming failure-conditioned repair is more data-efficient than error-agnostic augmentation.
Siyi Liu, Xiao-Rong Zhu, En-Jun Du et al.· 0 citations
Large vision-language models used as listwise rerankers must jointly process visual tokens from tens of candidates per query, making token pruning essential for practical deployment. Existing pruning methods retain tokens by attention saliency, yet we show that saliency is systematically misaligned with ranking contribution: visually prominent tokens often capture order-neutral patterns shared across candidates. This mismatch is layer-dependent: saliency becomes informative only where attention is concentrated, and normalized attention entropy diagnoses the reliability shift (Pearson r=0.87). We propose RaDiCal (Rank-Discriminative Calibration), a training-free framework that uses normalized attention entropy to decide when saliency can be trusted, fusing it with an attention-free rank-discriminative prior and selecting pruning layers from the same trust landscape. Across three retrieval benchmarks and multiple VLM architectures, RaDiCal matches Dense MRR@10 on Flickr30K and surpasses it on MSCOCO at a 20% token budget, ranks first among all pruning methods on FashionIQ, and holds within 1.2 pp on Flickr30K and MSCOCO at 10% retention. It cuts FLOPs by 39--45% and delivers 1.28--1.45$\times$ measured speedups across two VLM architectures without dataset-specific retuning.
Siyi Liu, Han-Jun Yang, Chen-Chen Zhang et al.· 0 citations
Large language models are increasingly deployed in education as tutors, teaching assistants, and content generators. These roles place demands that ordinary question answering does not: a usable education-facing model is supposed to be accurate, safe under sensitive prompts, instructionally useful, and aligned with pedagogical goals at the same time. Existing benchmarks evaluate these requirements largely in isolation, so none assesses education-facing suitability as an integrated profile. We introduce ELBench, the first benchmark to evaluate all four requirements (General Capability, Safety and Trustworthiness, Basic Education, and High-Level Cultivation) on the same models under a common protocol, combining curated public sources with newly synthesized safety and cultivation data. We evaluate nine models, seven frontier general-purpose systems and two education-specialized variants, and report three findings. First, module-level profiles are more informative than a single aggregate: the top six models are statistically indistinguishable on overall score, yet their module leaders differ substantially, and safety is anti-correlated with practical teaching (r = -0.83). Second, the Chinese-developed models lead the safety module, the most discriminative in the suite; this advantage is largest on region-specific normative content and narrows, but does not vanish, on universal-harm content. Third, the two education-specialized models lead neither education module, and on High-Level Cultivation all models share a systematic blind spot: on the structured judgment task they converge on the same non-reference option, favoring pedagogical style over fit to the stated goal, so the module scores uniformly low and does not separate models. This raises, but does not resolve, whether domain post-training keeps pace with frontier systems on education tasks.
Yi-Lin Jiang, Xiao-Rong Zhu, Fei Tan et al.· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.
