What do Vision Transformers Learn? A Visual Exploration
Authors: Amin Ghiasi, Hamid Kazemi, Eitan Borgnia, Steven Reich, Manli Shu, Micah Goldblum, Andrew Gordon Wilson, Tom Goldstein
AI-generated Key Points
- Vision Transformers (ViTs) are popular for computer vision tasks
- There is a lack of comprehensive understanding of how ViTs work and what they learn
- Neurons in ViTs trained with language model supervision are activated by semantic concepts rather than visual features
- ViTs and CNNs both detect image background features, but ViT predictions depend less on high-frequency information
- Both architecture types exhibit similar behavior in terms of feature progression from abstract patterns to concrete objects
- ViTs maintain spatial information in all layers except the final layer, which behaves as a learned global pooling operation and discards spatial information
- Large-scale visualizations were conducted on various ViT variants to validate the method's effectiveness
- This paper provides valuable insights into the workings of ViTs and sheds light on why they are becoming increasingly popular for computer vision tasks.
Abstract: Vision transformers (ViTs) are quickly becoming the de-facto architecture for computer vision, yet we understand very little about why they work and what they learn. While existing studies visually analyze the mechanisms of convolutional neural networks, an analogous exploration of ViTs remains challenging. In this paper, we first address the obstacles to performing visualizations on ViTs. Assisted by these solutions, we observe that neurons in ViTs trained with language model supervision (e.g., CLIP) are activated by semantic concepts rather than visual features. We also explore the underlying differences between ViTs and CNNs, and we find that transformers detect image background features, just like their convolutional counterparts, but their predictions depend far less on high-frequency information. On the other hand, both architecture types behave similarly in the way features progress from abstract patterns in early layers to concrete objects in late layers. In addition, we show that ViTs maintain spatial information in all layers except the final layer. In contrast to previous works, we show that the last layer most likely discards the spatial information and behaves as a learned global pooling operation. Finally, we conduct large-scale visualizations on a wide range of ViT variants, including DeiT, CoaT, ConViT, PiT, Swin, and Twin, to validate the effectiveness of our method.
Tools for this paper
Ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant
You can also chat with multiple papers at once here.
⚠The license of the paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the AI assistant only knows about the paper metadata rather than the full article.
The previous summary was created more than a year ago and can be re-run (if necessary) by clicking on the Run button below.
⚠The license of this specific paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the summarizing tools will be run using the paper metadata rather than the full article. However, it still does a good job, and you can also try our tools on papers with more open licenses.
Similar papers summarized with our AI tools
Navigate through even more similar papers through a
tree representationLook for similar papers (in beta version)
We compare the title and abstract with papers indexed in our database. For arXiv papers, we search within the same category; for DOI and other sources, we search across sources and subjects. You can rerun the search as our database grows.
Disclaimer: The AI-based summarization tool and virtual assistant provided on this website may not always provide accurate and complete summaries or responses. We encourage you to carefully review and evaluate the generated content to ensure its quality and relevance to your needs.