OmniMoE-VL: A Sparse Vision-Language Model with Coupled Visual-Depth Routing
Authors: Long Qian, Bingke Zhu, Jiaqi Wei, Yingying Chen, Jinqiao Wang
Organizations: Foundation Model Research Center, Institute of Automation, Chinese Academy of Sciences · School of Future Technology, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences · School of Engineering, Cardiff University · Wuhan AI Research
Vision-language models (VLMs) increasingly use sparse mixture-of-experts (MoE) to scale language-side computation, yet visual information is typically routed only after passing through a fixed cross-modal interface. This leaves an important decision unresolved: which intermediate visual representations should be exposed to language computation for a given question? We introduce OmniMoE-VL, a sparse VLM with a coupled visual-depth routed projector. For each image-prompt pair, the projector selects a sparse set of intermediate visual depths and reuses the resulting global preference to guide both local patch fusion and dynamic visual injection into the language model. This design enables question-dependent visual access while preserving the native visual-token sequence, and complements token-level expert routing in the vision and language stacks. Across eight image-based benchmarks, OmniMoE-VL achieves an average score of 85.9 with 28B total and 9B activated parameters. Controlled comparisons show that the routed visual interface provides the dominant architectural gain, while matched route and component controls, same-image route analysis, and route interventions further support the value of coupling and question-conditioned visual access.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Question-dependent visual evidence motivates depth selection. The first question requires label recognition and spatial context to identify the shampoo and its right-hand neighbor; the second requires the label on the rightmost bottle. A fixed interface supplies the same visual source to language experts across questions. Prompt-conditioned depth selection combines intermediate streams according to the evidence needed, connecting fine detail, object context, and spatial relations. Colors track the contributing visual streams.
Figure 2: OmniMoE-VL couples visual-depth selection with fusion and language-layer updates. (a) The model routes ten projected visual streams through one global depth distribution w . (b) Sixteen softly weighted prototypes form eight queries for top-4 depth selection. (c) The route supplies a prior for group-local weights gb , which fuse aligned features into 576 visual tokens. (d) The same w scales rank-32 updates at fixed language layers a(s)=s . Solid arrows carry features; dashed peach arrows carry shared routing weights.
Config
Stage I
Stage II
Stage III
Stage IV
Vision MoE (experts / top- k )
-
-
8 / 2
8 / 1
LLM MoE (experts / top- k )
-
8 / 2
8 / 2
8 / 2
Projector MoE (scales / top- k )
10 / 4
10 / 4
10 / 4
10 / 4
Trainable MoE params
Projector only
LLM only
Vision only
Projector + LLM + Vision
Data
OMVL-16M-Alignment
OMVL-16M-LLM
OMVL-16M-Vision
OMVL-16M-Joint
Image resolution
384×384
Table 1: Training configs for OmniMoE-VL .
Methods
# Params
# Act.
Benchmarks
Avg.
MMBench
MMVet
VQAT
VQAD
POPE
MMMU
OCRBench
ChartQA
Dense models
Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
8B
8B
85.0
-
82.9 †
-
-
69.6
89.6
89.6
83.3 (5)
GLM-4.6V-Flash
9B
9B
86.9
-
-
-
-
71.1
84.7
-
80.9 (3)
Qwen2.5-VL-7B
7B
7B
83.5
67.1
84.9
95.7
86.4
58.6
86.4
87.3
81.2 (8)
Sparse models
Table 2: Eight-benchmark comparison. Parameters are in billions; VQAT / VQAD denote TextVQA/DocVQA. Avg. uses listed scores; superscripts give their count. † marks independent evaluations (Appendix B.4 ). Bold/underlined scores denote first/second place.
Method
Avg.
MoE-LLaVA ( Lin et al., 2026 )
61.7
EvoMoE ( Jing et al., 2025 )
69.0
OmniMoE-VL (w/o. Visual stack MoE)
83.7
Full OmniMoE-VL
84.1
Table 3: Public-recipe results and matched projector controls. Left: comparison scores (benchmark coverage in Appendix B.3 ). Right: shared versus independent routes at matched parameter count, followed by component replacements. Visual experts are disabled throughout (b).
Variant
V
P
L
Avg.
LLM-only MoE
✗
✗
✓
80.3‡
LLM + Projector MoE
✗
✓
✓
85.2
Full OmniMoE-VL
✓
✓
✓
85.9
Table 4: Architectural ablations. (a) Stack placement across eight benchmarks: V/P/L denote vision/projector/language experts; ‡ marks the aggregate-derived mean (Appendix B.2 ). (b) Projector removals under the component protocol: Q/R/I denote query control, depth routing, and visual injection.
Table 5: Question-conditioned visual access. For same-image comparisons, Qwen3-VL depth-profile distances are measured in nats/token, while OmniMoE-VL route distances use total variation (TV). ΔD=Ddifferent−Dparaphrase . The lower block reports route interventions in OmniMoE-VL while holding the image, target question, and non-route inputs fixed.
Variant
Clean
Shifted
Drop
LLM-only MoE
81.3
77.4
4.8%
LLM + Projector MoE
87.0
85.8
1.4%
Full OmniMoE-VL
87.6
86.8
0.9%
Table 6: Robustness and deployment. (a) Clean/degraded scores under down-sampling and blur; drop is relative to clean accuracy. (b) Peak VRAM and decoding throughput on two H800 GPUs, BF16, 384×384 images (Appendix B.5 ).
Appendix figures & tables3 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Item
Setting
Vision backbone
SigLIP2-Giant, patch size 16, input 384×384
Language backbone
Qwen3-8B; hidden width d=4096
Visual depth taps
1,5,9,13,17,21,25,29,33,37 (one-based)
Vision parameter experts
8 experts, top-1, even-indexed blocks
Language parameter experts
8 experts, top-2, even-indexed blocks
Query bank
Q=16 ; probability floor 10−4
Appendix
Table 7: Current full-model implementation. Visual-depth routing and parameter-expert routing operate on different axes.
Route
Unit
Candidates
Role
p
Prompt
16 queries
Query participation
w
Image–prompt pair
10 depths, top-4
Shared global depth selection
gb
Patch group
10 depths, top-4
Local feature fusion
Vision experts
Token
8 experts, top-1
Visual feature processing
Language experts
Token
8 experts, top-2
Language-state processing
Appendix
Table 8: Routing objects and the decisions they control. Query participation is soft; visual-depth and parameter-expert selection use top- k routes.
Figure 3: Expert and visual-depth utilization on held-out data. Top: language-stack expert frequencies. Middle: vision-stack expert frequencies. Bottom: average global visual-depth weights. Layer axes enumerate the MoE blocks, and the depth labels S0–S9 enumerate the ten streams. E0–E7 identify parameter experts.
Large-scale vision-language mixture-of-experts (VL-MoE) models provide strong multimodal capability, but efficient deployment on memory-constrained platforms remains difficult. Existing MoE offloading systems are largely designed for text-centric workloads and become much less effective for visual-heavy inputs, where large numbers of visual tokens induce broader and less predictable expert accesses. We present VisMMoE, a VL-MoE offloading system built on a single systems insight: pruning redundant visual tokens can improve offloading not only by reducing computation, but also by reshaping expert demand. We refer to this effect as visual-expert affinity: token pruning makes expert accesses more concentrated within layers and more stable across layers, producing a smaller and more predictable expert working set. Guided by this insight, VisMMoE combines affinity-aware token compression, lookahead expert prediction, and cache/pipeline orchestration to improve expert locality and prefetch effectiveness under tight memory budgets. We implement VisMMoE on multiple frameworks and evaluate it on representative VL-MoE models and benchmarks. VisMMoE improves end-to-end inference performance by up to 2.68x and 1.61x, respectively, over strong baselines for today's VL-MoE deployments while maintaining competitive accuracy.
Cheng Xu, Xiaofeng Hou, Jiacheng Liu +1
Shanghai Jiao Tong University Minhang Qu, Shanghai, China
Multimodal mixture-of-experts (MoE) models combine sparse expert activation with visual-language capabilities, yet their inference remains costly because long visual-token sequences repeatedly incur attention, routing, dispatch, and expert-MLP computation. Existing methods typically compress either the token or expert dimension, leaving redundancy along the other. Our analysis reveals two complementary regularities: the depth required for visual propagation varies across inputs, while text-token routing exhibits concentrated and recurrent expert-importance patterns. Based on these observations, we propose DecoMoE, a two-dimensional structured compression framework that decouples visual propagation from expert computation. The Sample-Adaptive Visual Boundary (SAVB) predicts an input-dependent visual-exit layer at which the visual-token block is removed. The Routing-Calibrated Expert Prefix (RCEP) reorders experts offline using text-token routed mass and, from this predicted exit layer onward, retains at each MoE layer the shortest contiguous prefix covering a target routed-mass fraction. We evaluate DecoMoE on Qwen3-VL-MoE and InternVL3.5-30B-A3B across six benchmarks. On Qwen3-VL-MoE, DecoMoE retains 97.91% of dense-baseline performance while reducing computation from 27.06 to 16.73 TFLOPs and latency from 0.44 to 0.26 seconds, yielding a 1.69x speedup. Code will be available at https://github.com/ShawnTan86/DecoMoE.
Xudong Tan, Peng Ye, Ming Xie +4
Fudan University · The Chinese University of Hong Kong
Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) has become a prevalent backbone for large vision-language models (VLMs), yet how modality-specific signals should guide expert routing remains under-explored. Existing routing strategies are either hand-crafted or modality-agnostic, relying on idealized priors that ignore the layer-dependent modality fusion patterns in MoE-VLMs and provide little guidance for expert specialization. We propose Soft Modality-guided Expert Specialization (SMoES), which consists of dynamic soft modality scores that capture layer-dependent fusion patterns, an expert binning mechanism aligned with expert-parallel deployment, and an inter-bin mutual information regularization that encourages coherent modality specialization. Our method leverages attention-based or Gaussian-statistics modality scores to optimize mutual information regularization. Experiments across four MoE-based VLMs and 16 benchmarks demonstrate improvement on both effectiveness and efficiency: 0.9% and 4.2% average gain on multimodal and language-only tasks, 56.1% reduction in EP communication overhead, and 12.3% throughput improvement under realistic deployment. These results validate that aligning routing with modality-aware expert specialization unlocks MoE-VLM capacity and efficiency.