cs.CVJun 2, 2026

Beyond Encoder Accumulation: Measuring Encoder Roles in Multi-Encoder VLMs

Authors: Wei DingYudong ZhangRuobing XieXingwu SunJiansheng ChenYu Wang

Organizations: Tsinghua University Beijing, China · Tsinghua University, Tencent Beijing, China · University of Science and Technology Beijing Beijing, China

Abstract

As foundation models scale toward fusing more heterogeneous visual streams, understanding how diverse encoders interact under joint training becomes a prerequisite for principled design. Yet large vision-language models (LVLMs) currently lack the tools to do so, and parameter-efficient encoder configurations remain hard to identify before training. To re-examine encoder roles under joint training, on the 16-benchmark Cambrian-1 suite we retrain and evaluate all 31 non-empty subsets of five common vision encoders under a unified pipeline (~20k GPU-hours total), and report three findings. First, retraining each subset from scratch reveals encoder rankings that differ from those obtained by masking encoders on a fixed checkpoint, including which encoder ranks first overall. Second, we decompose each encoder's contribution into two axes, Capacity, the score an encoder reaches on its own, and Necessity, the drop when it is removed from the full pool. The two axes are not interchangeable. Pairing the two highest-Capacity encoders is suboptimal, while pairing a high-Capacity anchor with an adaptive complement matches the full five-encoder model. Adding further encoders beyond this pair yields only marginal gains. Third, at fixed parameter count, per-encoder pre-projector effective rank explains the residual score variation. The strongest pairs combine an anchor whose rank survives joint training with a complement whose rank expands under it, suggesting that higher-rank, less-collapsed projector inputs correspond to a more favorable optimization regime at the encoder-projector interface. Together, the Capacity-Necessity decomposition and the pre-projector rank analysis, along with comprehensive evaluation through retraining, expose a methodological gap in multi-encoder LVLM design, and offer concrete primitives for closing it.

Explore similar work

Jun 3, 2026cs.CV

Stateful Visual Encoders for Vision-Language Models

Vision-language models (VLMs) are increasingly used in multi-image, multi-turn agentic settings where decisions depend on visual changes. However, in existing open-weight VLMs, visual comparisons happen only inside the language model, while the visual encoder itself remains stateless: each image is encoded independently, without access to the prior visual context. As a result, small but task-critical changes may be attenuated before the language model has a chance to compare them, especially when those changes do not affect the high-level semantics of the scene. We introduce a Stateful Visual Encoder, which conditions each visual representation on prior visual features. Under supervised finetuning, VLMs equipped with stateful encoders achieve consistent improvements on controlled tasks involving cross-image spatial aggregation, multi-object visual differencing, and visual trajectory behavior cloning. These improvements are consistent across input resolutions, language model sizes, and VLM backbones. Finally, we validate our model on real-world tasks, including longitudinal radiology, fine-grained image comparison, and remote sensing, where stateful encoders consistently improve generalist VLM baselines and can match or surpass specialized models in selected domains. Project page: https://statefulvisualencoders.github.io/
Zirui Wang, Junwei Yu, Adam Yala +3
May 2, 2026cs.CV

Rethinking Model Selection in VLM Through the Lens of Gromov-Wasserstein Distance

Vision-Language Models (VLMs) have enhanced traditional LLMs with visual capabilities through the integration of vision encoders. While recent works have explored various combinations of vision encoders and LLMs, there still lacks a principled understanding of what makes a vision encoder suitable for VLM alignment. In this paper, we systematically investigate this question via comprehensive experiments on a curated collection of 19 pre-trained vision encoders from diverse sources. We first demonstrate that common practices, such as choosing encoders with the largest size or highest zero-shot accuracy, consistently fail to identify optimal models. In fact, these metrics show only weak to moderate correlation with VLM performance. This intriguing finding begs a fundamental question: What factors of vision-encoders matter in VLM? Through comprehensive analysis, we identify that the structural similarity across modalities plays a crucial but previously overlooked role in vision-encoder selection, which we measure using the Gromov-Wasserstein distance as a proxy. From a theoretical perspective, we show that the learnability of cross-modality mapping can be provably associated with the Gromov-Wasserstein distance. Empirical verification on 60+ full VLM training runs shows that our proposed inference-only metric performs significantly better than alternative model selection strategies and exhibits a much stronger correlation with final VLM performance, thereby enabling efficient and effective prediction of VLM performance before full training.
Muyang Li, Yucheng Liu, Jianbo Ma +3
Aug 31, 2026cs.CL

Where Do Multilingual Vision-Language Encoders Fail on Low-Resource Languages?

Recent multilingual vision--language encoders cover hundreds of languages in a single model, yet on two state-of-the-art instances retrieval on low-resource languages (LRL; e.g. Swahili) trails high-resource ones (HRL; e.g. English) by 30+30^+,pp. We ask where in the trained encoder this gap is located. Prior modality-gap and cross-lingual subspace work suggests a linear language direction at the output crowds out alignment-relevant geometry. We falsify this: LEACE drives the linear language classifier from >99%>99\% to near chance and iterated INLP to 3737--50%50\% while LRL retrieval moves within ±1.5\pm 1.5,pp and all tier means within 2.22.2,pp, tracking random controls. The linear bias is a \emph{symptom}, not the cause. Instead, the alignment-causal factor lies along the encoder's forward path: the EOS (end-of-sequence) hidden state's per-language trajectory diverges with depth. Substituting the EOS with its parallel English value three blocks before the projector lifts Swahili from 22.1%22.1\% to 69.1%69.1\% on one encoder (and reproduces on the other); three controls rule out pooled-position tautology and English specificity. A front-layer trunk that pulls each language's projection toward the parallel-content centroid corroborates the diagnosis at training time, recovering +9.6+9.6 / +17.1+17.1,pp on LRL XM3600 retrieval (1{,}000-image subset), with consistent gains across three further benchmarks while preserving HRL performance.
Donghoon Han, SungHyun Moon, Aidyn Zhakatayev +2