Contrastive Learning with Enhanced Abstract Representations using Grouped Loss of Abstract Semantic Supervision

Humans can recognize an image as an instance of a general concept, beyond simply identifying its objects and their relationships. In this paper, we investigate 1. The extent to which VLMs have this concept abstraction capacity, and 2. Strategies for encoding the sort of higher-concept information in images that would enable the resulting VLM model (CLEAR GLASS model) to have this capability to a greater degree. To this end, we introduce a grouped image-caption dataset (MAGIC), which consists of several groups of image captions and for each group a set of associated images and higher-level conceptual labels. We use a novel contrastive loss technique to induce the model to encode in the representation of each image (caption) in a group the information that is common to all members of the image-caption group. Our main contribution is a grouped contrastive loss function based on text-image contrastive groups (outer contrastive loss) as well as an inner loss which measures the distances between image-caption instances in the group. Our training methodology results in the CLEAR GLASS model having the concept abstraction capacity as an emergent capacity because the model is not exposed to the higher-level concepts associated with each group. Instead, the training forces the model to create for each image-caption group a semantic representation that brings it closer to the semantic representation of the higher-level concepts in the latent semantic space. Our experiments show that this training methodology results in a model which shows improvement in abstract concept recognition compared to SOTA models.

Is Model Attention Aligned with Human Attention? An Empirical Study on Large Language Models for Code Generation

Large Language Models (LLMs) have been demonstrated effective for code generation. Due to the complexity and opacity of LLMs, little is known about how these models generate code. To deepen our understanding, we investigate whether LLMs attend to the same parts of a natural language description as human programmers during code generation. An analysis of five LLMs on a popular benchmark, HumanEval, revealed a consistent misalignment between LLMs' and programmers' attention. Furthermore, we found that there is no correlation between the code generation accuracy of LLMs and their alignment with human programmers. Through a quantitative experiment and a user study, we confirmed that, among twelve different attention computation methods, attention computed by the perturbation-based method is most aligned with human attention and is constantly favored by human programmers. Our findings highlight the need for human-aligned LLMs for better interpretability and programmer trust.