Learning Visual Reasoning Without Strong Priors

Achieving artificial visual reasoning - the ability to answer image-related questions which require a multi-step, high-level process - is an important step towards artificial general intelligence. This multi-modal task requires learning a question-dependent, structured reasoning process over images from language. Standard deep learning approaches tend to exploit biases in the data rather than learn this underlying structure, while leading methods learn to visually reason successfully but are hand-crafted for reasoning. We show that a general-purpose, Conditional Batch Normalization approach achieves state-of-the-art results on the CLEVR Visual Reasoning benchmark with a 2.4% error rate. We outperform the next best end-to-end method (4.5%) and even methods that use extra supervision (3.1%). We probe our model to shed light on how it reasons, showing it has learned a question-dependent, multi-step process. Previous work has operated under the assumption that visual reasoning calls for a specialized architecture, but we show that a general architecture with proper conditioning can learn to visually reason effectively.Comment: Full AAAI 2018 paper is at arXiv:1709.07871. Presented at ICML 2017's Machine Learning in Speech and Language Processing Workshop. Code is at http://github.com/ethanjperez/fil

Analyzing the Behavior of Visual Question Answering Models

Recently, a number of deep-learning based models have been proposed for the task of Visual Question Answering (VQA). The performance of most models is clustered around 60-70%. In this paper we propose systematic methods to analyze the behavior of these models as a first step towards recognizing their strengths and weaknesses, and identifying the most fruitful directions for progress. We analyze two models, one each from two major classes of VQA models -- with-attention and without-attention and show the similarities and differences in the behavior of these models. We also analyze the winning entry of the VQA Challenge 2016. Our behavior analysis reveals that despite recent progress, today's VQA models are "myopic" (tend to fail on sufficiently novel instances), often "jump to conclusions" (converge on a predicted answer after 'listening' to just half the question), and are "stubborn" (do not change their answers across images).Comment: 13 pages, 20 figures; To appear in EMNLP 201