Recent Visual-Language Models (VLMs) have enhanced the capabilities of pre-trained LLMs by adding vision tokens alongside text, with approaches like LLaVA showing impressive results. However, the computational burden of processing up to 576 or 729 visual tokens makes edge deployment challenging. While various token pruning techniques require retraining, some are training-free and thus can easily adapt to architecture changes. We introduce ClustRS, a two-part, training-free algorithm for robust token pruning. Its first component is an attention-weighted, clustering algorithm that selects representative tokens from each semantic cluster. The second component, Residual Shrinkage, is a one-pass denoising step on the selected tokens. These training-free lightweight steps make LLaVA ready for real-world data, improving robustness to a wide range of image-noise types and intensities. Experimental results on the ScienceQA-IMG and MM-VET benchmarks show our method outperforms attention- and diversity-based methods by up to 20% under extreme noise and token conditions (reducing tokens by 97%, down to 16 tokens) on LLaVA 1.5 7b and achieves exceptional results on LLaVA-OneVision, where we match baseline performance with fewer than one-third of their tokens under mild noise conditions. Our study demonstrates a simple yet powerful alternative to both score-only and diversity-only pruning rules, paving the way for compute-efficient and noise-resilient VLM deployment.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Two views of the token distribution before and after corruption on the inputs of a LLaVA-1.5-7b. (a,c) PCA and (b,d) UMAP plot the same 576 visual tokens in 2-D; gray dots denote all tokens, coloured dots denote those retained by competing pruning rules. Top row: clean image. Bottom row: the same image with heavy Gaussian noise ( σ=3.0 ). Note how noise collapses several semantic groupings into one, illustrating why a purely diversity-based selector can over-allocate tokens under severe corruption.
Noise level σ
Avg. rank change (top–15)
Top–15 overlap
0.0
0
100%
0.1
288
13%
1.0
321
0%
3.0
308
0%
Table 1: Instability of FasterVLM’s token ranking under increasing Gaussian noise. Avg. rank change (top-15) : The average absolute change in rank of importance for the original top-15 tokens after noise is applied. For example, a token ranked 1st by FasterVLM on a clean image could drop to rank 300 even with a small noise. Top-15 overlap : The percentage of tokens that remain in the top-15 set after noise is applied.
Figure 2: High-level comparison of the token–selection pipelines. Left: FasterVLM keeps the k tokens with the highest [CLS] self-attention scores immediately after the vision encoder. Right: our C + H module first applies attention-weighted Huber k -means to cluster the projected tokens and then retains a single, most important representative from each cluster, with the help of the [CLS] self-attention scores from the pre-projection representations. This reduced set is then enhanced with RRS to denoise each token with its cluster statistics, before being forwarded to the language model.
Figure 3: Comparison of full‐image vs. cluster‐focused token movement after RRS. ( a ) Global PCA on all N tokens highlights which selected tokens have moved (red → blue) in context. ( b ) Local PCA fit on one cluster’s tokens shows fine‐grained per‐cluster shifts.
Figure 4: MM-VET accuracy of LLaVA-1.5-7B under additive Gaussian noise ( σ∈[0.1,3.0] ) for three token budgets ( k=16,50,144 ).
Figure 5: MM-VET accuracy of LLaVA-1.5-7B under salt–&–pepper noise ( ρ∈[0.01,0.50] ) for the three token budgets evaluated in the Chapter. Gaussian-noise counterparts are shown in Figure 4 .
Noise σ
Token Budget ( k )
FasterVLM
DivPrune
VisionZip
ClustRS
Clean
16
0.211
0.232
0.239
0.271
50
0.290
0.284
0.285
0.304
144
0.322
0.318
0.322
0.320
0.1
16
0.218
0.211
0.210
0.270
50
0.310
0.280
0.300
0.316
144
0.329
0.290
0.329
0.333
Table 2: MM-VET scores for LLaVA-1.5-7B under Gaussian noise with standard deviation σ . We compare the training-free token pruning methods FasterVLM, DivPrune, VisionZip, and ClustRS at different retained-token budgets k . The best result in each row is shown in bold.
Setting
FasterVLM
DivPrune
VisionZip
ClustRS
k=16
Brightness and contrast
0.203
0.218
0.225
0.250
Cutout
0.183
0.213
0.210
0.214
k=50
Brightness and contrast
0.280
0.265
0.268
0.292
Cutout
0.213
0.223
0.228
0.233
Table 4: Mean MM-VET scores under brightness and contrast transformations and cutout corruption. Brightness-and-contrast results are averaged over six configurations: brightness factors b∈{0.5,1.5,2.0} and contrast factors c∈{0.5,1.5,2.0} . Cutout results are averaged over three severity levels, p∈{0.1,0.25,0.4} , denoting the fraction of the image area masked.
Noise ( ρ )
Token Budget ( k )
FasterVLM
DivPrune
VisionZip
ClustRS
0.0 (Clean)
16
67.8
69.2
68.9
69.0
50
69.2
68.5
68.9
69.2
144
67.9
68.3
68.4
68.8
0.1
16
67.5
68.6
68.3
68.6
50
68.5
67.6
67.8
68.7
144
68.4
67.6
68.0
68.0
Table 5: ScienceQA scores under Gaussian noise for three token budgets k∈{16,50,144} .
Method
k (Tokens Kept)
Total Visual Overhead (ms)
FasterVLM
144 and 16
33-34
DivPrune
144 and 16
39-40
VisionZip
144 and 16
34-38
ClustRS (Ours)
16
35
ClustRS (Ours)
144
52
Table 7: Comparison of total visual overhead for different token pruning methods.
Corruption Type
Level
FasterVLM
DivPrune
ClustRS (Ours)
Motion Blur
High (B=31)
0.184
0.219
0.222
Motion Blur
Medium (B=15)
0.218
0.235
0.254
JPEG Artifacts
Medium (q=60)
0.250
0.261
0.284
JPEG Artifacts
Low (q=30)
0.240
0.230
0.282
Table 8: MM-VET scores of LLaVA-1.5-7b with 16 visual tokens under different image corruptions. Here B is the size of the blurring kernel, and q is the quality factor of the PIL library (going from 1 -worst- to 95 -best-)
Tokens
Noise
Clustering
C+H
ClustRS
Gain
( k )
( σ )
only
(RRS)
16
0.5
0.233
0.254
0.272
+0.018
1.0
0.195
0.223
0.250
+0.027
2.0
0.185
0.193
0.222
+0.029
3.0
0.151
0.156
0.193
+0.037
50
0.5
0.284
0.312
0.290
-0.022
Table 9: Ablation study on MM-VET under Gaussian noise, showing the distinct contributions of our proposed components. We compare standard k-means++ Clustering ( Clustering ), robust clustering with Huber distance ( C+H ), and our full ClustRS method which adds Residual Shrinkage (RRS). The results demonstrate that while clustering provides a baseline improvement, the Huber distance is critical for robustness, and RRS provides further gains, especially in low-token regimes. All scores are accuracy on the LLaVA-1.5-7B model.
Appendix figures & tables4 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Noise ( σ )
Token Budget ( k )
FasterVLM
DivPrune
ClustRS (salience)
0.0 (Clean)
16
0.138
0.164
0.272
50
0.145
0.257
0.347
180
0.293
0.334
0.418
0.1
16
0.123
0.166
0.284
50
0.130
0.215
0.348
180
0.296
0.289
0.363
Appendix
Table 10: MM-VET scores under Gaussian noise ( σ ) for LLaVA OneVision 7b across different token budgets ( k ). The σ=0.0 row represents performance on clean images. Scores compare FasterVLM, DivPrune, and our combined C+H (salience) + RRS method.
Figure 6: MM-VET accuracy of LLaVA 7b Onevision under additive Gaussian noise ( σ∈[0.1,3.0] ) for token budgets k∈{16,50,180} .
Condition
Token Budget ( k )
τ=0.25
τ=0.5
τ=1.0
τ=2.0
τ=4.0
k=16
Clean
0.250
0.260
0.273
0.261
0.259
Gaussian ( σ=0.5 )
0.220
0.240
0.240
0.230
0.220
Gaussian ( σ=2.0 )
0.167
0.173
0.161
0.165
0.157
Salt-and-pepper ( ρ=0.10 )
0.230
0.252
0.256
0.248
0.238
k=50
Clean
0.283
0.294
0.302
0.307
0.298
Gaussian ( σ=0.5 )
0.252
0.260
0.270
0.266
0.254
Appendix
Table 12: Sensitivity analysis of the Huber threshold τ on MM-VET with LLaVA-1.5-7B. The default value is τ=1 . We see a broad performance plateau for τ∈[0.5,2] , with stronger degradation only for very small or large thresholds.
Condition
Token Budget ( k )
No RRS
[0,1]
[0.05,0.95]
[0.10,0.95]
[0.20,0.90]
[0.30,0.80]
k=16
Clean
0.268
0.252
0.275
0.272
0.266
0.260
Gaussian ( σ=0.5 )
0.238
0.232
0.249
0.246
0.246
0.230
Gaussian ( σ=2.0 )
0.174
0.151
0.171
0.160
0.171
0.174
S&P ( ρ=0.10 )
0.240
0.244
0.254
0.251
0.250
0.240
k=50
Clean
0.306
0.281
0.308
0.306
0.307
0.298
Gaussian ( σ=0.5 )
0.265
0.259
0.272
0.274
0.272
0.263
Appendix
Table 13: Sensitivity analysis of the clipping interval applied to the RRS shrinkage coefficient αi on MM-VET with LLaVA-1.5-7B. “No RRS” uses C+H token selection without residual shrinkage. The default clipping interval is [0.10,0.95] . Clipping is essential for preventing unstable shrinkage, whereas performance is relatively insensitive to the precise clipped interval. RRS improves performance under mild and sparse corruption but can be detrimental under severe dense Gaussian noise, where retaining the original selected tokens is preferable.
Vision-language models (VLMs) rely on long visual token sequences for visual understanding, making the prefill stage expensive in both computation and memory. Most existing pruning methods follow an absolute-ranking paradigm, assigning importance scores to visual tokens and retaining a fixed top-K subset. In this work, we argue that this paradigm is fundamentally brittle: attention sinks distort token importance rankings, while image redundancy and query-dependent visual evidence make fixed token budgets unreliable across inputs. We propose OccamToken, a training-free framework that replaces absolute token ranking with register-anchored relative evidence testing. Instead of asking which tokens are globally important, OccamToken evaluates whether a visual token provides information beyond a register-based reference. Our key insight is that register tokens naturally absorb low-information attention patterns, making them a stable reference for identifying genuinely informative visual evidence. Based on this principle, OccamToken performs both image-adaptive redundancy pruning and query-adaptive relevance pruning through dynamic thresholds derived from register attention. Across LLaVA-NeXT, LLaVA-v1.5, and Qwen3-VL, OccamToken consistently improves the accuracy-efficiency trade-off without additional training. Notably, on LLaVA-NeXT, it reduces 2,880 visual tokens to approximately 40 while preserving over 93% of the original accuracy, enabling stable visual token compression even in the extreme 1.4% retention regime.
Visual token pruning is a promising approach to reducing the inference cost of large vision-language models (LVLMs), yet aggressive token reduction often causes substantial performance degradation. We identify three key factors behind this degradation: text-guided selection bias, information loss from discarded tokens, and positional distortion caused by sequence compaction. Based on these observations, we propose VPRune, a training-free pre-LLM pruning framework consisting of visual-only diversity selection, similarity-guided token recycling, and position-preserving restoration. Experiments on FastVLM-1.5B across multiple vision-language benchmarks demonstrate that VPRune achieves a favorable accuracy--compression trade-off, with particularly pronounced advantages under aggressive compression. Furthermore, evaluations on edge-device show that VPRune effectively reduces end-to-end inference latency while maintaining superior task performance, demonstrating its practicality for resource-constrained LVLM deployment.
Guangchuan Lv, Dianxing Shi, Dingjie Fu
Northeastern University · Beihang University · Huazhong University of Science and Technology
Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs) rely on dense visual tokens to capture fine-grained visual information, but processing all these tokens incurs substantial computational and memory overhead during inference. To address this issue, we propose ResPrune, a training-free visual token pruning framework that enables efficient LVLM inference by selecting a compact yet informative subset of visual tokens. ResPrune formulates visual token pruning as a subspace reconstruction problem and employs a greedy subspace expansion strategy guided by residual energy, allowing it to preserve the geometric structure of the original visual token space. To further incorporate cross modal alignment, the selection process is conditioned on textual relevance, encouraging the retention of tokens that are both informative and instruction-relevant. The proposed method is lightweight and model-agnostic, and can be seamlessly integrated into existing LVLM pipelines without retraining or architectural modifications. Extensive experiments on multiple LVLM backbones, including LLaVA-1.5, LLaVA-NeXT, and Qwen2.5-VL, demonstrate that ResPrune consistently outperforms existing pruning approaches across a wide range of benchmarks, while achieving effective reductions in computation, memory consumption, and inference latency.
Xu Li, Yi Zheng, Yuxuan Liang +5
College of Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence, Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, China