Unified vision-language models (VLMs) perform both text-to-image (T2I) and image-to-text (I2T) generation with one shared Transformer backbone, yet how the backbone processes the condition in either direction remains poorly understood. We study this question from the perspective of conditional guidance: we probe every attention head to show the activation difference between two branches of classifier-free guidance (CFG) with different conditional guidance. On two unified VLMs of autoregressive and masked-diffusion paradigms, the probing reveals a subset of heads that are more sensitive to the change of condition while others are agnostic to it. This characteristic pattern holds in both T2I and I2T generation and is largely stable across data samples, demonstrating the internal mechanism of unified VLMs. Motivated by this, we propose a new inference-time intervention approach for unified multimodal generation, named HeadTuned-CFG, which uses the probed condition-change awareness to select and tune the conditional guidance at the attention-head level. Experiments show consistent benefits in both multimodal generation directions of unified VLMs without additional training, and in particular substantial improvements over strong baselines in T2I generation. These results further support the key finding of our probing analysis: the observed pattern of functional specialization is an intrinsic property of unified VLMs.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Condition-change aware (green) and agnostic (brown) attention heads of Janus. Left: T2I generation ; each map shows where the generated image attends to a boxed keyword of the prompt. Right: I2T generation with the same image as input; each map shows where a boxed keyword of the generated caption attends in the input image. Middle: the generated (input) image and head-level condition-change awareness map of both T2I and I2T probing (layer by head, brighter means higher awareness), with the visualized heads marked. The Muddit counterpart is in Appendix A .
Figure 2: Layer-by-head condition-change awareness δ(l,h) of Muddit and Janus, averaged over ∣P∣=500 probing samples (and over steps for Muddit). Left of the dashed line: T2I generation; right: I2T generation.
Figure 3: Proposed HeadTuned-CFG method on Muddit. Illustration of head-level probing, selection, and tuning process of the single-stream attention heads.
animals
art
fashion
food
indoor
landscape
logo
people
plants
vehicles
full
CFG
33.91
42.82
38.79
39.53
43.82
40.93
40.27
43.85
49.93
36.89
20.90
PAG
52.31
57.31
53.30
64.44
61.24
65.27
51.48
60.09
76.86
54.04
34.37
PAG+CFG
38.21
44.40
40.03
42.27
43.74
45.92
39.46
45.28
56.44
38.59
22.39
HeadTuned-CFG
30.41
36.70
34.02
33.60
36.17
34.56
36.65
36.88
43.01
30.93
16.29
Table 1: Muddit T2I: FID per MJHQ category ( n=3,000 each) and on MJHQ-full ( n=30,000 ); CFG ( w=3 ), PAG ( λ=2.5 , single-stream blocks 9–10), PAG+CFG ( λ=1.5 on CFG with w=3 ), and HeadTuned-CFG ( w=9 , k=50% , s=0.4 ).
Figure 4: Heads tuned by the four selection rules on Muddit (single-stream block by head), with FID on MJHQ-animals at w=9 , k=50% , s=0.4 . The probed and the top- 50% selections change per denoising step; their panels show the fraction of the 64 steps in which a head is tuned.
random
popular
adversarial
overall
Acc
F1
Acc
F1
Acc
F1
Acc
F1
Regular
84.17
81.60
82.97
80.47
81.33
78.99
82.82
80.35
VCD
87.77
86.33
85.97
84.63
83.93
82.79
85.89
84.58
HeadTuned-VCD
88.80
87.76
86.43
85.54
84.13
83.50
86.45
85.60
Table 3: Janus on POPE, accuracy and F1 (%) per split ( n=3,000 each): Regular decoding, VCD ( w=8 , β=0.2 , T=500 ), and HeadTuned-VCD ( w=8 , k=20 heads, s=1.3 ).
existence
count
position
color
total
Regular
138.33
56.67
90.00
93.33
378.33
VCD
170.00
81.67
91.67
123.33
466.67
HeadTuned-VCD
170.00
83.33
91.67
130.00
475.00
Table 4: Janus on the hallucination subset of MME, score (accuracy + image-level accuracy, out of 200) per subtask and in total: Regular decoding, VCD ( w=10 , β=0.2 , T=500 ), and HeadTuned-VCD ( w=8 , k=15 heads, s=1.1 ).
Appendix figures & tables19 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Figure 5: Condition-change aware (green) and agnostic (brown) attention heads of Muddit, in the layout of Figure 1 : the T2I maps show the alignment of each head’s CFG difference with the keyword in value space, the I2T maps the attention of the decoded keyword to the image, and the middle column the generated image and the Muddit probes with the visualized heads marked.
T2I
I2T
Spearman ρ
0.970±0.014
0.962±0.023
Appendix
Table 5: Mean pairwise Spearman rank correlation of the condition-change awareness ranking of Janus across ∣P∣=500 probing samples.
Figure 6: Cross-sample stability of the condition-change awareness ranking in Muddit, per denoising step. Left: T2I generation. Right: I2T generation.
FID ↓
CLIP ↑
IR ↑
HPS ↑
P/R ↑
D/C ↑
IS ↑
Aes. ↑
CFG
20.90
0.320
0.63
0.257
0.733/0.464
0.856/0.733
21.83
5.85
PAG
34.37
0.294
−0.26
0.217
0.597/0.382
0.577/0.508
16.45
5.66
PAG+CFG
22.39
0.318
0.64
0.264
0.720/0.431
0.851/0.712
20.77
5.91
HeadTuned-CFG
16.29
0.324
0.82
0.271
0.762 / 0.529
0.969 / 0.808
22.77
5.84
Appendix
Table 6: Muddit on MJHQ-full, overall ( n=30,000 ): CFG ( w=3 ), PAG ( λ=2.5 on single-stream blocks 9–10), PAG+CFG ( λ=1.5 on top of CFG with w=3 ), and HeadTuned-CFG ( w=9 , k=50% , s=0.4 ). IR is ImageReward; HPS is human preference score; Aes. is aesthetic score; P/R is precision/recall; D/C is density/coverage.
FID ↓
CLIP ↑
IR ↑
HPS ↑
P/R ↑
D/C ↑
IS ↑
Aes. ↑
CFG
10.51
0.321
0.59
0.251
0.660/ 0.666
0.660/0.797
24.62
5.53
HeadTuned-CFG
9.92
0.318
0.56
0.249
0.682 /0.660
0.702 / 0.811
24.51
5.52
Appendix
Table 7: Janus on MJHQ-full, overall ( n=30,000 ): CFG ( w=4 ) versus HeadTuned-CFG ( w=4 , k=15% , s=0.75 ); abbreviations as in Table 6 .
Figure 7: Janus on MJHQ-full ( n=30,000 ): FID against CLIP, ImageReward, HPS, aesthetic score, Inception Score, precision, recall, density, and coverage over the guidance scale w (labels), for vanilla CFG and HeadTuned-CFG ( k=15% , s=0.75 unless noted).
Figure 8: Heads tuned by the four selection rules on Janus (layer by head; colored = tuned), with FID on MJHQ-animals at w=4 , k=15% , s=0.75 .
w
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
5.0
7.0
9.0
FID
77.96
41.95
36.17
34.51
33.91
34.05
35.35
37.40
Appendix
Table 8: Vanilla CFG on Muddit, MJHQ-animals ( n=3,000 ), over the guidance scale w .
k\s
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
40%
31.60
31.33
31.91
–
–
45%
–
31.11
30.83
31.51
–
50%
–
30.61
30.41
31.21
–
55%
–
–
31.63
31.01
31.86
60%
–
–
31.77
31.76
32.25
Appendix
Table 9: HeadTuned-CFG search on Muddit, MJHQ-animals, w=9 : FID over the head fraction k (rows) and strength s (columns). Vanilla CFG at w=9 : FID 37.40.
k\s
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
15%
–
–
33.87
33.61
25%
–
34.09
33.70
33.80
35%
34.57
33.83
33.98
34.00
Appendix
Table 10: HeadTuned-CFG search on Muddit, MJHQ-animals, w=3 : FID over the head fraction k (rows) and strength s (columns). Vanilla CFG at w=3 : FID 33.91.
w
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
5.0
7.5
FID
27.45
28.07
27.32
27.57
27.92
28.87
Appendix
Table 11: Vanilla CFG on Janus, MJHQ-animals ( n=3,000 ), over the guidance scale w .
k\s
0.60
0.65
0.70
0.75
0.80
10%
26.51
26.57
26.34
27.09
–
15%
–
26.65
26.04
25.95
26.92
20%
–
28.12
27.08
26.32
27.19
25%
–
29.74
27.23
26.40
27.22
30%
–
–
28.88
26.95
27.35
Appendix
Table 12: HeadTuned-CFG search on Janus, MJHQ-animals, w=4 : FID over the head fraction k (rows) and strength s (columns). Vanilla CFG at w=4 : FID 27.32.
k\s
0.70
0.75
0.80
10%
27.11
26.76
28.01
15%
26.95
26.48
27.97
20%
27.13
26.53
28.21
Appendix
Table 13: HeadTuned-CFG search on Janus, MJHQ-animals, w=7.5 : FID over the head fraction k (rows) and strength s (columns). Vanilla CFG at w=7.5 : FID 28.87.
w
2
4
6
8
10
12
Acc
87.10
87.60
87.70
87.77
87.77
87.77
F1
85.47
86.12
86.25
86.33
86.33
86.33
Appendix
Table 14: VCD on Janus, POPE random split ( n=3,000 ): accuracy and F1 (%) over the guidance scale w=1+α ( β=0.2 , T=500 ). Regular decoding: accuracy 84.17, F1 81.60.
Acc.
F1
k\s
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
15
88.47
88.70
88.60
88.73
87.28
87.63
87.57
87.76
20
88.63
88.80
88.73
88.70
87.50
87.76
87.74
87.76
25
88.53
88.53
88.27
88.00
87.40
87.46
87.22
87.01
Appendix
Table 15: HeadTuned-VCD search on Janus, POPE random split, on top of VCD at w=8 (accuracy 87.77, F1 86.33): accuracy and F1 (%) over the number of tuned heads k (rows) and strength s (columns).
w
2
4
6
8
10
12
existence
145.00
160.00
165.00
165.00
170.00
170.00
count
58.33
76.67
76.67
76.67
81.67
81.67
position
80.00
93.33
93.33
91.67
91.67
91.67
color
115.00
130.00
130.00
123.33
123.33
123.33
total
398.33
460.00
465.00
456.67
466.67
466.67
Appendix
Table 16: VCD on Janus, hallucination subset of MME: score per subtask and in total over the guidance scale w=1+α ( β=0.2 , T=500 ). Regular decoding: 138.33 / 56.67 / 90.00 / 93.33, total 378.33.
k\s
1.05
1.10
1.15
1.20
1.25
1.30
10
461.67
466.67
458.33
460.00
468.33
445.00
15
465.00
471.67
460.00
470.00
465.00
458.33
20
468.33
463.33
466.67
468.33
461.67
455.00
Appendix
Table 17: HeadTuned-VCD search on Janus, hallucination subset of MME, on top of VCD at w=6 : total score over the number of tuned heads k (rows) and strength s (columns). VCD at w=6 : 465.00.
k\s
1.05
1.10
1.15
1.20
1.25
1.30
10
465.00
458.33
461.67
460.00
461.67
443.33
15
473.33
475.00
460.00
465.00
463.33
458.33
20
466.67
466.67
463.33
468.33
460.00
450.00
Appendix
Table 18: HeadTuned-VCD search on Janus, hallucination subset of MME, on top of VCD at w=8 : total score over the number of tuned heads k (rows) and strength s (columns). VCD at w=8 : 456.67.
k\s
1.05
1.10
1.15
1.20
1.25
1.30
10
470.00
463.33
461.67
460.00
461.67
443.33
15
468.33
470.00
465.00
465.00
458.33
448.33
20
466.67
466.67
458.33
463.33
460.00
445.00
Appendix
Table 19: HeadTuned-VCD search on Janus, hallucination subset of MME, on top of VCD at w=10 : total score over the number of tuned heads k (rows) and strength s (columns). VCD at w=10 : 466.67.
Unifying visual understanding and generation in one model holds immense promise, but remains challenging and expensive due to heavy compute and data demands and conflicts between the visual features needed for these two capabilities. To address these challenges, we present Argus-Unified, a compact, effective and unified multimodal model built with low demand on computation and data. Instead of aligning modalities from scratch, Argus-Unified effectively leverages pretrained vision-language models (VLMs) that provide strong multimodal priors. Specifically, we introduce hybrid visual tokens that preserve continuous tokens for understanding while learning discrete tokens for generation from a frozen unified vision encoder. Our training pipeline includes two stages: the first stage learns a quantizer and image decoder on top of the frozen vision encoder, the second stage trains the LLM initialized from a pretrained VLM for the unified multimodal modeling. Using by far the least amount of data (15.6M) and the lowest cost (~$2,000), we demonstrate that unified multimodal models can be trained economically while achieving strong performance in both understanding and generation. Notably, our model attains state-of-the-art multimodal understanding on GQA, POPE, and VQAv2, and competitive generation quality compared to models with dedicated vision encoders (e.g., Janus, Janus-Pro), all at ~10x lower cost and with ~5x less data. We envision Argus-Unified as a useful baseline that lowers the development barrier for unified models.
How a vision-language model internally solves the task of describing an image is far from obvious. We find that the model develops a specific mechanism for this: a small set of attention heads in its language-model backbone, which we call gaze heads, whose attention tracks the image region the model is currently describing. We find them with a simple correlation score from a few forward passes, using comic strips as a controlled testbed where narrative order is laid out spatially. These gaze heads do not just track the image tokens being described: redirecting their attention to a chosen region forces the VLM to describe that region instead. A single attention-mask intervention on the top-100 gaze heads, fewer than 9% of all heads, steers the model's answer to any chosen comic panel at 83.1% accuracy, while the same intervention on random heads fails to redirect the answer, and intervening on all heads destroys generation. The same lever also extends to continuous control: switching the gaze target mid-generation makes the model wrap up its current panel description and move to the new one within a few tokens. Beyond comics, the same intervention redirects answers to chosen regions in natural COCO images. The mechanism further recurs across model sizes from 2B to 32B parameters and across other VLM architectures, although some frozen-encoder families show no comparable head set. More broadly, this shows that targeted edits identified through mechanistic analysis can serve as practical inference-time levers for steering multimodal model behavior, without any retraining. Our code, interactive demo, and datasets are available at https://gaze.baulab.info/
Multi-reference image generation aims to synthesize images from textual instructions while faithfully preserving subject identities from multiple reference images. Existing VLM-enhanced diffusion models commonly rely on decoupled visual conditioning: semantic ViT features are processed by the VLM for instruction understanding, whereas appearance-rich VAE features are injected later into the diffusion backbone. Despite its intuitive design, this separation makes it difficult for the model to associate each semantically grounded subject with visual details from the correct reference image. As a result, the model may recognize which subject is being referred to, but fail to preserve its identity and fine-grained appearance, leading to attribute leakage and cross-reference confusion in complex multi-reference settings. To address this issue, we propose UniCustom, a unified visual conditioning framework that fuses ViT and VAE features before VLM encoding. This early fusion exposes the VLM to both semantic cues and appearance-rich details, enabling its hidden states to jointly encode the referred subject and corresponding visual appearance with only a lightweight linear fusion layer. To learn such unified representations, we adopt a two-stage training strategy: reconstruction-oriented pretraining that preserves reference-specific appearance details in the fused hidden states, followed by supervised finetuning on single- and multi-reference generation tasks. We further introduce a slot-wise binding regularization that encourages each image slot to preserve low-level details of its corresponding reference, thereby reducing cross-reference entanglement. Experiments on two multi-reference generation benchmarks demonstrate that UniCustom consistently improves subject consistency, instruction following, and compositional fidelity over strong baselines.
Yiyan Xu, Qiulin Wang, Wenjie Wang +5
University of Science and Technology of China · Kling Team, Kuaishou Technology