The Platonic Representation Hypothesis (PRH) suggests that neural networks are converging toward similar representation spaces. As language models become more capable, their representations are aligning with those of vision models. However, recent work has questioned whether this trend continues to hold for newer language models. Moreover, it has been shown that representation similarity metrics can be confounded by model depth and width, requiring appropriate baselines for interpretation. In this work, we first investigate where alignment emerges between unimodal models across model layers and representation dimensions. Next, we find that the PRH capability-alignment trend persists for newer models as long as the captions are sufficiently clean and informative. Finally, we contextualize cross-modal alignment, introducing unimodal and multimodal baselines on various datasets. Our results show that the cross-modal representational alignment of unimodal models can surpass that of explicitly aligned vision-language models, but remains substantially behind the alignment observed for models of the same modality. Code is available at https://github.com/ExplainableML/prh-closer-look.
Leander Girrbach, Alexander von Recum, Kirill Bykov, Zeynep Akata
原文摘要
Detecting whether and in particular how two data distributions differ is a fundamental statistical problem. For example, we might be interested in which concepts (expressed in natural language) differ between two classes, the outputs of different generative models, or the same model with different prompt specifications. When working with large and complex image datasets, we intuitively think that first selecting concepts from a broad list using fine-grained patch embeddings, and then optimizing the concepts to better fit the data is an effective workflow. However, prior work instead uses MLLMs to propose concepts and image-level embeddings to select them. Therefore, we systematically compare these techniques and find that selecting concepts from broad lists can replace MLLM-proposals at obviously lower cost. MLLM inference can then be spent on optimizing selected concepts instead to achieve substantial improvements. Additionally, by designing a new benchmark that focuses on low-prevalence and multi-concept distinctions, we find that selecting nonredundant concepts instead of only the most distinguishing concepts matters, and we introduce techniques for how to effectively do this. Finally, we show how our methods address important problems like detecting spurious correlations and biases. Overall, our work presents a fundamental perspective shift on how we analyze interpretable distributional differences between datasets.