EDBT 2026 Demo / reviewers in the wild / expert
Kia Ghods
dblp:392/3769
· DBLP profile ↗
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2024
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1 · 1 since 2021
Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.
| Artificial intelligence
1 paper |
Vision and language · 50% Trustworthy machine learning · 50% |
Topics — the 4 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Computer vision › Vision and language › compositionality
binding problem |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Understanding the Limits of Vision Language Models Through the Lens of the Binding Problem · NeurIPS 2024 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › interpretability › model debugging
failure mode analysis |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Understanding the Limits of Vision Language Models Through the Lens of the Binding Problem · NeurIPS 2024 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
interpretability |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Understanding the Limits of Vision Language Models Through the Lens of the Binding Problem · NeurIPS 2024 |
Computer vision › Vision and language
multimodal reasoning |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Understanding the Limits of Vision Language Models Through the Lens of the Binding Problem · NeurIPS 2024 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
feedforward processing analysis · 0.8cognitive science theory · 0.8
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | Understanding the Limits of Vision Language Models Through the Lens of the Binding ProblemabstractRecent work has documented striking heterogeneity in the performance of state-of-the-art vision language models (VLMs), including both multimodal language models and text-to-image models. These models are able to describe and generate a diverse array of complex, naturalistic images, yet they exhibit surprising failures on basic multi-object reasoning tasks -- such as counting, localization, and simple forms of visual analogy -- that humans perform with near perfect accuracy. To better understand this puzzling pattern of successes and failures, we turn to theoretical accounts of the binding problem in cognitive science and neuroscience, a fundamental problem that arises when a shared set of representational resources must be used to represent distinct entities (e.g., to represent multiple objects in an image), necessitating the use of serial processing to avoid interference. We find that many of the puzzling failures of state-of-the-art VLMs can be explained as arising due to the binding problem, and that these failure modes are strikingly similar to the limitations exhibited by rapid, feedforward processing in the human brain. Declan Campbell, Sunayana Rane, Tyler Giallanza, Nicolò De Sabbata, Kia Ghods, Amogh Joshi 0004, Alexander Ku, Steven Frankland, Thomas L. Griffiths 0001, Jonathan D. Cohen 0003, Taylor W. Webb |
NeurIPS | 5 |