PolyFrame at MWE-2026 AdMIRe 2: When Words Are Not Enough: Multimodal Idiom Disambiguation
Organizations: University of Luxembourg, Luxembourg · Radio Télévision Luxembourg (RTL), Luxembourg
Abstract
Multimodal models struggle with idiomatic expressions due to their non-compositional meanings, a challenge amplified in multilingual settings. We introduced PolyFrame, our system for the MWE-2026 AdMIRe2 shared task on multimodal idiom disambiguation, featuring a unified pipeline for both image+text ranking (Subtask A) and text-only caption ranking (Subtask B). All model variants retain frozen CLIP-style vision--language encoders and the multilingual BGE M3 encoder, training only lightweight modules: a logistic regression and LLM-based sentence-type predictor, idiom synonym substitution, distractor-aware scoring, and Borda rank fusion. Starting from a CLIP baseline (26.7% Top-1 on English dev, 6.7% on English test), adding idiom-aware paraphrasing and explicit sentence-type classification increased performance to 60.0% Top-1 on English and 60.0% Top-1 (0.822 NDCG@5) in zero-shot transfer to Portuguese. On the multilingual blind test, our systems achieved average Top-1/NDCG scores of 0.35/0.73 for Subtask A and 0.32/0.71 for Subtask B across 15 languages. Ablation results highlight idiom-aware rewriting as the main contributor to performance, while sentence-type prediction and multimodal fusion enhance robustness. These findings suggest that effective idiom disambiguation is feasible without fine-tuning large multimodal encoders.
Figures & tables
| System | EN dev | EN test | PT dev (zero-shot) | |||
| Top-1 (%) | NDCG@5 | Top-1 (%) | NDCG@5 | Top-1 (%) | NDCG@5 | |
| CLIP baseline | 26.7 | 0.655 | 6.7 | 0.607 | – | – |
| + Idiom replacement | 60.0 | 0.800 | – | – | – | – |
| + LLM sentence typing | 40.0 | 0.739 | – | – | – | – |
| + All improvements | 60.0 | 0.797 | – | – | 60.0 | 0.822 |
| System | Top 1 A | Top 1 B | ST Acc. |
| CLIP baseline (XLM-RoBERTa-ViT-H-14) | 26.7 | 6.7 | 53.3 |
| GPT-4o | 32.5 | 28.0 | 58.0 |
| Qwen3-32B | 31.0 | 26.5 | 56.5 |
| Llama3.1-70B | 29.5 | 25.0 | 55.0 |
| DeepSeek-v3 | 28.0 | 23.5 | 53.5 |
| Mistral-large | 30.0 | 25.5 | 54.5 |
Appendix figures & tables1 asset
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
| Language | Subtask A (img+txt) | Subtask B (text) | ||
| Top 1 (%) | NDCG@5 | Top 1 (%) | NDCG@5 | |
| Chinese (ZH) | 35.0 | 0.72 | 28.0 | 0.69 |
| Georgian (KA) | 27.0 | 0.69 | 28.0 | 0.68 |
| Greek (EL) | 36.0 | 0.72 | 28.0 | 0.71 |
| Igbo (IG) | 33.0 | 0.73 | 29.0 | 0.69 |
| Kazakh (KK) | 33.0 | 0.74 | 28.0 | 0.72 |
Figurative Language Understanding
Figurative language understanding studies how people and AI interpret nonliteral meaning in metaphors, idioms, proverbs, puns, and related forms.
See all 45 papers