What Matters for Grocery Product Retrieval with Open Source Vision Language Models

Fine-grained food visual--semantic understanding requires models to capture subtle distinctions across ingredients, cooking methods, doneness, color, texture, and plate composition. Although CLIP-style vision-language models provide a natural framework for this task, their effectiveness is limited when training relies on heterogeneous web-collected image--text pairs. Such data often exhibit a web-to-target domain gap and cross-modal misalignment, where images differ from the target distribution and captions are noisy, multilingual, or weakly grounded in visual content. We propose a data-centric multimodal alignment method for fine-grained food description and recognition. Our method first performs target-aware data selection to identify visually relevant training subsets, then applies VLM-based caption refinement to generate visually grounded, target-style descriptions. Using these curated image--caption pairs, we train complementary CLIP-style retrieval experts and further combine their decisions through a hierarchical VLM-assisted multi-expert decision-level fusion strategy that invokes the VLM only when experts disagree. Experiments show that our data refinement strategy significantly improves retrieval performance over naive web supervision, with VLM-based caption refinement alone yielding an average performance gain of approximately 19%. Our full method also achieves more than twice the retrieval score of pure VLM-based retrieval while remaining substantially more efficient.

Vision-language models (VLMs) show promise for agricultural classification, but zero-shot performance on disease, pest, damage, quality, and species identification remains poor, and it is unclear whether this reflects weak visual features or a failure to connect them to domain knowledge. We build a benchmark of 116 datasets, 834 classes, and 8,324 images spanning these tasks to isolate where the gap arises. Linear probing shows VLM vision encoders already encode agricultural features nearly as separable as a self-supervised DINOv3 baseline, ruling out weak visual representations as the primary bottleneck. Conditioning each model on an oracle reference description (an upper bound on its parametric knowledge) closes most of the gap left by an unaided lower bound, showing VLMs already know more about agriculture than they show. To close this gap without an oracle description at inference time, we structure test-time reasoning around a fixed, per-task diagnostic rubric: the model generates $K$ candidate responses and a Probabilistic Pivot Tournament (PPT) verifier, scored pairwise against the rubric, selects the best one. This nearly doubles judged F1 over the lower bound and matches or exceeds the upper bound on several tasks, notably pushing Gemma 4 E4B-it's disease F1 to 0.71, above its own upper bound of 0.60. However, the verifier's letter-scale confidence score has the opposite of its intended effect: filtering to its most confident predictions does not improve accuracy and correlates negatively with correctness across every model and pool size tested, so the score cannot serve as a measure of predictive uncertainty, and most of the observed gain likely comes from rubric-grounded generation rather than pairwise verification.

We conduct a systematic study of 18 widely used vision-language benchmarks and identify three major issues: 1) many items do not rely on visual cues and therefore fail to effectively measure multimodal understanding; 2) many items are already close to performance saturation for current LVLMs, which limits their discriminative power; 3) a small number of anomalous items affect the reliability of evaluation results. To this end, we propose MMGist, a curated benchmark that covers seven capability dimensions and contains 7,262 items. MMGist is constructed through a three-stage pipeline, which sequentially combines text-ablation filtering, cross-model saturation filtering, and anomaly detection filtering. We conduct extensive experiments on 27 leading LVLMs and compare MMGist with the raw pool of 23,250 items. The results show that MMGist preserves model rankings with high fidelity, with Spearman $ρ= 0.98$, while reducing evaluation items by 69% and improving cross-model discrimination by 78%. Further results indicate that Visual Logic remains a systematic weakness of current LVLMs, while knowledge-intensive dimensions such as Expert Knowledge dimensions remain important factors for distinguishing closed-source models from open-source models. These findings suggest that high-quality evaluation should prioritize visual dependency, discriminative power, and reliability, rather than simply pursuing benchmark scale.