跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail
← 研踪 PaperTrail

arXiv:2610.35857 · v1

Do vision models know that three is three?

首次提交 2026-10-27 01:58
版本更新 2026-10-27 01:58
雷达观测 2026-10-29 00:35
arXiv ↗PDF ↗

摘要

Do vision models encode the transition $2{\to}3$ the same way whether it appears in handwritten digits or in hand gestures, and do they "understand" that clean${\to}$dirty is the same transformation regardless of whether it is applied to a kitchen or a carpet? The linear representation hypothesis (LRH) answers this for language models: concept changes correspond to directions in (language) embedding space. In vision, the same concept can manifest in visually unrelated "regimes" that rarely co-occur: images of digits and hands do not share much in common in pixel space. To understand whether vision models still encode the underlying abstract concepts, we study 46 vision encoders across architectures, training objectives, and scales, on 10 concept families including numerosity, age, object identity, and MIT-States attributes. Within each regime, we find statistically significant concept directions near-universally across our tested models. However, two distinct regimes do not always share the same concept direction. Several models learn multiple linear structures for the same concept transition, split across regimes. We call this phenomenon "fragmented linearity": strong local linearity coexisting with near-absent global linearity. Fragmentation is, however, not fixed: models with stronger local linearity progressively escape it (local-global linearity correlated with $τ\in [0.38, 0.89]$ across all concepts), and where global linearity does emerge, concept directions can transfer as linear probes across regimes.

AI 论文解读

基于摘要 · 非全文审阅

此版本尚未生成 AI 解读。解读由后台任务生成并按论文版本保存,登录后共享已有结果。

版本差异

目前只观测到一个版本,无法比较变化。之后收录新版本时,会在这里对照标题、作者、分类和摘要。

观测到的版本

相邻记录可能跳过中间版本;首次发现 v2 及以上也会标为版本更新。

v1 · 2026-10-27 01:58 · 最新观测版本

Do vision models know that three is three?

Do vision models encode the transition $2{\to}3$ the same way whether it appears in handwritten digits or in hand gestures, and do they "understand" that clean${\to}$dirty is the same transformation regardless of whether it is applied to a kitchen or a carpet? The linear representation hypothesis (LRH) answers this for language models: concept changes correspond to directions in (language) embedding space. In vision, the same concept can manifest in visually unrelated "regimes" that rarely co-occur: images of digits and hands do not share much in common in pixel space. To understand whether vision models still encode the underlying abstract concepts, we study 46 vision encoders across architectures, training objectives, and scales, on 10 concept families including numerosity, age, object identity, and MIT-States attributes. Within each regime, we find statistically significant concept directions near-universally across our tested models. However, two distinct regimes do not always share the same concept direction. Several models learn multiple linear structures for the same concept transition, split across regimes. We call this phenomenon "fragmented linearity": strong local linearity coexisting with near-absent global linearity. Fragmentation is, however, not fixed: models with stronger local linearity progressively escape it (local-global linearity correlated with $τ\in [0.38, 0.89]$ across all concepts), and where global linearity does emerge, concept directions can transfer as linear probes across regimes.

查看此版本解读 →查看此版本原文 ↗