@inproceedings{li-etal-2025-exploring-generative,
    title = "Exploring How Generative {MLLM}s Perceive More Than {CLIP} with the Same Vision Encoder",
    author = "Li, Siting  and
      Koh, Pang Wei  and
      Du, Simon Shaolei",
    editor = "Che, Wanxiang  and
      Nabende, Joyce  and
      Shutova, Ekaterina  and
      Pilehvar, Mohammad Taher",
    booktitle = "Proceedings of the 63rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers)",
    month = jul,
    year = "2025",
    address = "Vienna, Austria",
    publisher = "Association for Computational Linguistics",
    url = "https://preview.aclanthology.org/ingestion-acl-25/2025.acl-long.499/",
    pages = "10101--10119",
    ISBN = "979-8-89176-251-0",
    abstract = "Recent research has shown that CLIP models struggle with visual reasoning tasks that require grounding compositionality, understanding spatial relationships, or capturing fine-grained details. One natural hypothesis is that the CLIP vision encoder does not embed essential information for these tasks. However, we find that this is not always the case: The encoder gathers query-relevant visual information, while CLIP fails to extract it. In particular, we show that another branch of Vision-Language Models (VLMs), Generative Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs), achieve significantly higher accuracy than CLIP in many of these tasks using the *same* vision encoder and weights, indicating that these Generative MLLMs *perceive more*{---}as they extract and utilize visual information more effectively. We conduct a series of controlled experiments and reveal that their success is attributed to multiple key design choices, including patch tokens, position embeddings, and prompt-based weighting. On the other hand, enhancing the training data alone or applying a stronger text encoder does not suffice to solve the task, and additional text tokens offer little benefit. Interestingly, we find that fine-grained visual reasoning is not exclusive to generative models trained by an autoregressive loss: When converted into CLIP-like encoders by contrastive finetuning, these MLLMs still outperform CLIP under the same cosine similarity-based evaluation protocol. Our study highlights the importance of VLM architectural choices and suggests directions for improving the performance of CLIP-like contrastive VLMs."
}