Testing the Limits of Fine-Tuning for Improving Visual Cognition in Vision Language Models

Luca M. Schulze Buschoff, Konstantinos Voudouris, Elif Akata, Matthias Bethge, Joshua B. Tenenbaum +1 more
2/21/2025
cs.LG

No confident code implementation found for this paper. 4 possible matches can be shown below.

Abstract

Pre-trained vision language models still fall short of human visual cognition. In an effort to improve visual cognition and align models with human behavior, we introduce visual stimuli and human judgments on visual cognition tasks, allowing us to systematically evaluate performance across cognitive domains under a consistent environment. We fine-tune models on ground truth data for intuitive physics and causal reasoning and find that this improves model performance in the respective fine-tuning domain. Furthermore, it can improve model alignment with human behavior. However, we find that task-specific fine-tuning does not contribute to robust human-like generalization to data with other visual characteristics or to tasks in other cognitive domains.

View on arXivView PDF

Code Implementations

No confident code match yet

We couldn't find an author-owned or strongly-evidenced community implementation for this paper. 4 weaker matches are hidden by default — verify before relying on them.

No code implementations found yet.

Know of an implementation? Let us know in the comments below!

Similar Papers

Cite this paper

@article{buschoff2025testing,
  title  = {Testing the Limits of Fine-Tuning for Improving Visual Cognition in Vision Language Models},
  author = {Luca M. Schulze Buschoff and Konstantinos Voudouris and Elif Akata and Matthias Bethge and Joshua B. Tenenbaum and Eric Schulz},
  year   = {2025},
  eprint = {2502.15678},
  archivePrefix = {arXiv},
  url    = {http://arxiv.org/abs/2502.15678v2},
  journal = {ICML 2025 2025}
}

Add a badge to your README

Shows whether official code is linked for this paper.

Code of Paper badge
[![Code of Paper](https://codeofpaper.com/badge/2502.15678.svg)](https://codeofpaper.com/paper/2502.15678)

Discussion