ArticleJournal of imaging2024
Collaborative Modality Fusion for Mitigating Language Bias in Visual Question Answering.
Article in Journal of imaging, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Language bias stands as a noteworthy concern in visual question answering (VQA), wherein models tend to rely on spurious correlations between questions and answers for prediction. This prevents the models from effectively generalizing, leading to a decrease in performance. In order to address this bias, we propose a novel modality fusion collaborative de-biasing algorithm (CoD). In our approach, bias is considered as the model's neglect of information from a particular modality during prediction. We employ a collaborative training approach to facilitate mutual modeling between different modalities, achieving efficient feature fusion and enabling the model to fully leverage multimodal knowledge for prediction. Our experiments on various datasets, including VQA-CP v2, VQA v2, and VQA-VS, using different validation strategies, demonstrate the effectiveness of our approach. Notably, employing a basic baseline model resulted in an accuracy of 60.14% on VQA-CP v2.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.