PDMP: Rethinking Balanced Multimodal Learning via Performance-Dominant Modality Prioritization
Authors: Shicai Wei, Chunbo Luo, Qiang Zhu, Yang Luo
Organizations: Laboratory of Intelligent Collaborative Computing, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China. · School of Information and Communication Engineering, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Sichuan, China. · Peng Cheng Laboratory, Shenzhen, China.
Multimodal learning has attracted increasing attention due to its practicality. However, it often suffers from insufficient optimization, where the multimodal model underperforms even compared to its unimodal counterparts. Existing methods attribute this problem to the imbalanced learning between modalities and solve it by gradient modulation. This paper argues that balanced learning is not the optimal setting for multimodal learning. On the contrary, imbalanced learning driven by the performance-dominant modality that has superior unimodal performance can contribute to better multimodal performance. And the under-optimization problem is caused by insufficient learning of the performance-dominant modality. To this end, we propose the Performance-Dominant Modality Prioritization (PDMP) strategy to assist multimodal learning. Specifically, PDMP firstly mines the performance-dominant modality via the performance ranking of the independently trained unimodal model. Then PDMP introduces asymmetric coefficients to modulate the gradients of each modality, enabling the performance-dominant modality to dominate the optimization. Since PDMP only relies on the unimodal performance ranking, it is independent of the structures and fusion methods of the multimodal model and has great potential for practical scenarios. Finally, extensive experiments on various datasets validate the superiority of PDMP.
Figures & tables
Fig. 1: The visualization on two audio-visual datasets: CREMA-D and AVE. (a) and (b) present the performance curves of the multimodal models under different values of w . w is the optimization dependency coefficient (see Eq. 5 ), which measures the relative contribution of the audio and visual modalities during training. ‘vanilla’ means the default w without any gradient modulation. (c) and (d) present the unimodal performance curves.
Fig. 2: Illustration of back-propagation processing for balanced learning and the proposed performance-dominant modality prioritization. Balanced learning mines the optimization-dominant modality and aligns its gradient go with the gradient gr of the remaining modality. In contrast, performance-dominant modality prioritization mines the performance-dominant modality and makes its gradient gp larger than the gradient gr of the remaining modality, guiding it to dominate the optimization.
Fig. 3: The visualization on the CREMA-D datasets. (a) presents the performance of the audio and visual branches in the multimodal model. (b) presents the performance of the audio and visual modality in the unimodal model.
Dataset
CREMA-D
KS
AVE
Methods
Acc
macro F1
Acc
macro F1
Acc
macro F1
Audio-only
57.27
57.89
48.67
48.89
62.16
58.54
Visual-only
62.17
62.78
52.36
52.67
31.40
29.87
Concatenation
58.83
59.43
64.97
65.21
66.15
62.46
Grad-Blending
68.81
69.34
67.31
67.68
67.40
63.87
OGM-GE
64.34
64.93
66.35
66.76
65.62
62.97
TABLE I: Comparison with existing modulation strategies on CREMA-D, Kinetics-Sounds, and AVE datasets. The proposed PDMP achieves the best performance. Bold and underline mean the best and second-best results, respectively.
Dataset
CEFA
UCF101
Methods
Acc
macro F1
Acc
macro F1
Concatenation
64.91
65.26
80.41
79.40
Grad-Blending
65.68
66.11
81.73
80.84
OGM-GE
66.33
66.76
81.15
80.36
AGM
67.65
67.98
81.55
80.36
PMR
68.38
68.89
81.36
80.37
TABLE II: (Left) : Comparison with imbalanced multimodal learning methods on CEFA dataset with three modalities. (Right) : Comparison with imbalanced multimodal learning methods on the UCF101 dataset with 101 categories. Bold and underline mean the best and second-best results, respectively.
Dataset
CREMA-D
AVE
KS
Method
Acc
Acc
Acc
Audio-only
57.27
62.16
48.67
Visual-only
62.17
31.40
52.36
Concatenation
58.83
66.15
64.97
Summation
62.24
67.25
64.53
Film
56.21
59.18
57.35
TABLE III: Performance on CREMA-D, AVE and KS datasets with various fusion methods. Combined with PDMP, conventional fusion methods consistently gain considerable improvement. † indicates PDMP is applied.
Fig. 4: Visualization of optimization dependency coefficient w on CREMA-D (a) and AVE (b) dataset, respectively. Here, s0 and s1 in Eq. 5 represent the logit output of audio and visual modalities, respectively. ‘Vanilla’ denotes the conventional multimodal model trained without PDMP.‘PDMP’ denotes the model trained with PDMP, respectively.
Dataset
CREMA-D
AVE
KS
Method
Acc
Acc
Acc
SE-Fusion
61.22
58.03
59.15
SE-Fusion†
67.86
64.87
65.27
mmFormer
59.92
60.14
64.26
mmFormer†
68.37
67.49
68.18
TABLE IV: Performance on different datasets with CNN-based and transformer-based architectures, respectively. † indicates PDMP strategy is applied, which achieves better performance.
γp
1
5
10
15
20
25
CREMA-D
58.83
70.22
76.76
80.21
79.26
78.36
AVE
66.15
67.55
69.73
71.28
70.64
69.85
KS
64.97
68.39
72.18
70.92
69.66
68.77
TABLE V: Ablation experiments of γp on different datasets. The fusion method here is concatenation.
Scale
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Audio
26.9
31.8
36.4
44.6
48.7
Visual
22.7
36.7
43.2
49.7
52.6
TABLE VI: Experiments on KS with different subset scales. n% indicates the proportion of the training dataset. The fusion method here is concatenation.
Dataset
CREMA-D
AVE
KS
Learning Rate
Acc
Acc
Acc
0.001
58.83
66.15
64.97
0.015
63.45
69.16
68.13
0.001†
80.21
71.28
72.18
TABLE VII: Ablation experiments of learning rate on different datasets. † indicates PDMP is applied. γr is set as 15
Multimodal learning often suffers from modality imbalance, where the joint optimization process is dominated by a single modality. Existing methods typically estimate modality imbalance from score disparities derived from prediction uncertainty or optimization statistics. However, due to distinct prediction uncertainty and learning dynamics across modalities, direct comparison of such scores may misinterpret intrinsic modality differences as progress gaps, leading to biased imbalance estimation. In this paper, we propose Function-Space Guided Multimodal Optimization (FGMO), which leverages a function-space progress signal to assess modality-wise optimization progress and coordinate optimization across modalities to alleviate modality imbalance. Specifically, we introduce Functional Progress Estimation (FPE) to measure each modality's update-induced function-space response and calibrate it against a loss-aligned unimodal reference, producing a comparable progress signal. Based on this signal, Functional Response Control (FRC) redistributes modality-level function-space budgets and realizes the target responses through tensor-wise learning-rate adjustment. Theoretical analysis establishes a one-step target-contraction property of FRC under bounded controller-state mismatch, and extensive experiments demonstrate the effectiveness of FGMO across multiple multimodal benchmarks.
Multimodal learning often suffers from modality imbalance, where modalities that converge faster dominate optimization while others remain undertrained. Existing approaches typically mitigate this issue by strengthening the weak modality or adjusting optimization gradients. However, such strategies mainly compensate for optimization rate discrepancies, often at the expense of the strong modality's optimization capacity, without analyzing how these discrepancies arise at the modality level. Based on theoretical insights and empirical observations, we argue that the discrepancy of learning pace arises from differences in the mapping difficulty between modality-specific feature space and the shared label space. To address this issue, we propose Balanced Multimodal Label Reshaping (BMLR), the first method that promotes multimodal balance from the label-side design. BMLR reshapes the cross-modal label space to equalize mapping difficulty across modalities, thereby facilitating modality interaction and injecting richer inter-class information into each modality. Extensive experiments across multiple architectures demonstrate that BMLR consistently improves multimodal performance and exhibits strong compatibility with diverse model designs. The source code will be released soon.
Multimodal learning (MML) falls into the optimization dilemma due to the modality imbalance phenomenon, leading to suboptimal overall performance in practice. While many attempts primarily focus on balancing the optimization dynamics across modalities to address this issue, we identify a subtle yet critical flaw: optimization yields asymmetric gains in predictive certainty, with the strong modality more confident than the weak one, driving imbalanced modality contributions. In this paper, our analysis reveals that this flaw stems from unimodal characteristics rather than multimodal learning, and this confidence discrepancy can be corrected by positive cross-modal intervention. Based on this insight, we propose multimodal Max Confidence Regularization (MaxCR) to dynamically intervene in modality semantic confidence. Specifically, the semantic confidence of each modality is tracked using a nonlinear sparsity measure. We then design max suppression and max excitation based on this measure to regularize strong and weak modalities, respectively. They penalize and encourage the top-1 confidence, thereby constraining multimodal prediction. To this end, strong and weak modalities are expected to make calibrated confidence, thereby improving the overall performance. Empirical experiments on widely used datasets reveal the superiority of our method through comparison with various state-of-the-art (SOTA) multimodal learning baselines.
Longfei Huang, Xiangyu Wu, Yang Yang
Nanjing University of Science and Technology · Alibaba Group