Compositional zero-shot learning (CZSL) aims to recognize novel combinations of previously observed objects and attributes. Prior work showed that large-scale vision-language models encode decomposable semantic structures that can be recomposed to enable generalization. The Geodesically Decomposable Embeddings (GDE) framework formalizes this by identifying directions in the tangent space at the Frechet mean of the embedding distribution, which encode primitive visual concepts. Unseen attribute-object compositions can be synthesized through vector addition of these primitives. We revisit the assumption that compositional generalization requires explicit attribute-object pair re-composition. By means of new compositional scoring functions and extensive evaluations, we show that directly using the decomposed primitives suffices for recognizing unseen compositions. In that, we gain insights on how the geometry of the embedding manifold (Euclidean, spherical, or hyperbolic) and dataset structure affect compositional reasoning. Across models (CLIP, DINOv2, MERU, HyCoCLIP), we show that compositional structure consistently emerges as primitive representations, enabling inference on CZSL benchmarks (MIT-States, VAW-CZSL, UT-Zappos50K, Clothing16K) and group robustness on Waterbirds and CelebA. Code: https://github.com/nis-research/Compositionality-with-Primitives.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Geodesics initiating from the origin across Euclidean, spherical, and hyperbolic manifolds. The plots illustrate the structural differences imposed by space curvature: (a) Euclidean space is flat; (b) spherical space has positive curvature with origin estimated on the Fréchet mean of the dataset embeddings; (c) Hyperbolic space has negative curvature with a well-defined origin, resulting in tree-like hierarchical representation space. Data clusters are differentiated by color and marker type ({ red , blue } × { square , circle }).
Figure 2: Illustration of decomposition and primitive-based methods. For unseen samples of Blue Squares , the goal is to obtain meaningful representations of the concepts Blue and Square from seen training samples. Then, the primitive directions in the tangent space ( vo and va ) can independently be compared to the test samples projected to the same space. Alternatively, it is possible to calculate the intrinsic mean for each concept label directly on the manifold ( μa and μo and use it as a reference for the test sample via a manifold-specific inner product to estimate similarity. The pair-based alternatives proposed in previous work either rely on the projection on the manifold of the summed primitives in the tangent space ( vo+va ), or leverage the textual object-attribute compositional description embedded in the manifold.
Harmonic Mean (%, ↑ )
Unseen Pair Accuracy (%, ↑ )
Model
ZS Pair
ZS Prim.
GDE Pair
GDE Prim.
Int. Prim.
ZS Pair
ZS Prim.
GDE Pair
GDE Prim.
Int. Prim.
MIT-States
CLIP ViT-L/14
8.03
10.56
9.37
10.90
10.40
8.04
13.03
8.62
11.98
11.75
DINOv2 ViT-L/14
3.00
3.69
6.56
8.22
8.04
2.88
4.78
6.26
9.33
9.42
CLIP-B (GRIT)
4.61
4.70
4.75
6.64
6.38
4.24
5.36
4.80
7.18
7.12
MERU-B
4.68
4.74
3.58
6.57
6.36
4.40
5.54
3.40
7.25
7.40
HyCoCLIP-B
5.26
6.53
4.28
7.94
7.54
4.67
8.20
3.71
8.75
8.76
Table 1: Harmonic Mean (HM) and Unseen Pair Accuracy (UPA) results across models and datasets. Primitive-based inference consistently improves compositional generalization over GDE pair composition, particularly on unseen attribute–object pairs.
Harmonic Mean (%, ↑ ) / After Whitening
Model
ZS Pair
ZS Prim.
GDE Pair
GDE Prim.
Int. Prim.
CLIP ViT-L/14
11.76 / –
9.61 / –
16.41 / 16.69
8.04 / 13.75
9.33 / 22.80
DINOv2 ViT-L/14
2.81 / –
0.38 / –
12.06 / 13.64
3.20 / 12.40
2.49 / 16.17
CLIP-B (GRIT)
2.33 / –
1.61 / –
10.81 / 13.53
9.04 / 12.79
8.95 / 14.65
MERU-B
3.38 / –
3.80 / –
10.39 / 12.79
8.99 / 8.80
9.36 / 16.32
HyCoCLIP-B
4.34 / –
3.94 / –
8.50 / 13.01
5.89 / 8.14
5.86 / 15.11
Table 2: CZSL metrics before and after whitening across models and inference methods for the low-intrinsic variance UT-Zappos dataset . Whitening consistently improves primitive-based inference and restores its advantage over pair composition.
Figure 3: Intrinsic dataset variance measured using squared geodesic distance to the dataset Fréchet mean across different geometries. From left to right: DINOv2 ViT-L/14 with Euclidean geometry, CLIP ViT-L/14 with spherical geometry, and HyCoCLIP-B with hyperbolic geometry. UT-Zappos exhibits substantially lower variance than the broader datasets, while geometry-specific whitening increases the variance of UTZ-W toward the same regime.
Zero Shot
GDE-Primitive
Intrinsic Primitive
Model
Avg. Acc. ↑
WG. Acc. ↑
Gap ↓
Avg. Acc. ↑
WG. Acc. ↑
Gap ↓
Avg. Acc. ↑
WG. Acc. ↑
Gap ↓
Waterbirds
CLIP ViT-L/14
80.9
48.8
32.1
90.8
85.7
5.13
90.8
85.7
5.17
DINOv2 ViT-L/14
69.1
42.4
26.7
85.5
48.0
37.5
85.0
49.4
35.6
CLIP-B (GRIT)
58.4
36.9
21.5
77.1
64.4
12.7
77.0
64.4
12.7
MERU-B
58.3
31.7
26.6
63.0
39.0
24.0
77.1
62.6
14.6
HyCoCLIP-B
53.9
20.3
33.7
62.6
38.3
24.3
77.1
62.6
14.5
Table 3: Group-robustness results (%). Average Accuracy (Avg. Acc.), Worst-Group Accuracy (WG. Acc.), and their gap on Waterbirds and CelebA. GDE and intrinsic object primitives consistently improve over zero-shot object inference without retraining or group annotations, with especially large gains for the hyperbolic models MERU and HyCoCLIP.
Appendix figures & tables8 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Harmonic Mean (%, ↑ )
Unseen Pair Accuracy (%, ↑ )
Dataset
M
GDE Pair
GDE Prim.
Int. Prim.
GDE Pair
GDE Prim.
Int. Prim.
MIT
euc
6.56
8.22
8.04
6.26
9.33
9.42
sph
2.17
4.70
4.85
1.87
4.61
4.75
VAW
euc
1.30
2.05
2.20
1.63
2.60
2.81
sph
0.28
0.68
0.72
0.28
0.65
0.71
Appendix
Table 4: Evaluation results utilizing the Talk2DINO as Euclidean ( euc ) or Spherical ( sph ) embeddings (after ℓ2 normalisation). The native euclidean manifold substantially outperforms spherical.
CLIP ViT-L/14
DINOv2 ViT-L/14
CLIP-B (GRIT)
HyCoCLIP-B
MERU-B
CORR
MI
CORR
MI
CORR
MI
CORR
MI
CORR
MI
MIT-States
object-attribute
0.453
13.0
0.456
13.0
0.444
13.0
0.453
13.0
0.473
13.0
object-pair
0.825
191.0
0.895
320.7
0.831
148.7
0.839
119.7
0.843
119.4
attribute-pair
0.530
77.9
0.516
129.0
0.511
44.5
0.513
44.2
0.531
44.3
VAW-CZSL
object-attribute
0.187
7.2
0.183
7.2
0.195
6.9
0.191
6.9
0.173
6.9
object-pair
0.575
38.1
0.713
61.0
0.565
28.1
0.565
26.6
0.576
29.9
Appendix
Table 5: Cross Correlation and Mutual Information estimates between the GDE primitives and the model embedding. Since GDE primtives live in euclidean space, usual statistics calculation methods apply.
Harmonic Mean (%, ↑ )
Unseen Pair Accuracy (%, ↑ )
Dataset
Model
Weighted
Uniform
Weighted
Uniform
MIT
CLIP ViT-L/14
10.90
10.39
11.98
11.47
DINOv2 ViT-L/14
8.22
8.02
9.33
9.10
CLIP-B (GRIT)
6.64
6.12
7.18
6.62
MERU-B
6.57
6.59
7.25
7.14
HyCoCLIP-B
7.94
7.83
8.75
8.62
Appendix
Table 6: Disabling noise estimation results in minor performance variations across models for GDE primitives validating that weighing carries no directional information.
Object Accuracy (%, ↑ )
Attribute Accuracy (%, ↑ )
Model
ZS Pair
ZS Prim.
GDE Pair
GDE Prim.
Int. Prim.
ZS Pair
ZS Prim.
GDE Pair
GDE Prim.
Int. Prim.
MIT-States
CLIP ViT-L/14
47.33
47.33
43.79
43.68
43.94
15.76
20.05
18.38
20.57
20.68
DINOv2 ViT-L/14
32.70
29.70
40.13
40.25
40.22
8.49
11.97
16.00
18.45
18.41
CLIP-B (GRIT)
36.59
35.81
33.91
35.50
35.58
10.35
13.48
14.09
17.41
16.97
MERU-B
37.31
36.34
34.03
35.39
35.51
10.57
13.22
11.71
17.48
17.07
HyCoCLIP-B
39.79
39.72
37.41
39.01
39.15
10.95
16.26
12.00
18.09
17.71
Appendix
Table 7: Open-world Compositional Zero-Shot Learning results (%, ↑ ). Metrics include Object Accuracy and Attribute Accuracy.
Seen Pair Accuracy (%, ↑ )
Overall Pair Accuracy (%, ↑ )
Model
ZS Pair
ZS Prim.
GDE Pair
GDE Prim.
Int. Prim.
ZS Pair
ZS Prim.
GDE Pair
GDE Prim.
Int. Prim.
MIT-States
CLIP ViT-L/14
29.03
22.23
31.18
25.21
25.88
15.76
20.05
18.38
20.57
20.68
DINOv2 ViT-L/14
16.64
9.87
27.23
20.63
19.96
8.49
11.97
16.00
18.45
18.41
CLIP-B (GRIT)
21.72
16.93
22.18
18.99
18.82
10.35
13.48
14.09
17.41
16.97
MERU-B
22.61
16.76
19.58
18.91
19.20
10.57
13.22
11.71
17.48
17.07
HyCoCLIP-B
23.87
15.50
21.97
21.34
20.97
10.95
16.26
12.00
18.09
17.71
Appendix
Table 8: Open-world Compositional Zero-Shot Learning results (%, ↑ ). Metrics include Seen Pair Accuracy and Overall Pair Accuracy.
Figure 4: Radius distributions for HyCoCLIP-B showing attribute primitives, object primitives, and attribute-object compositions in hyperbolic space. Dashed lines indicate mean radii. We find, objects intrinsic primitives are consistently occupy the higher radius stratum compared to attributes, except in the case of CelebA and Waterbirds. The pair embeddings themselves are significantly further away, which is consistent with the hierarchical entailment objective of these models.
Figure 5: Radius distributions for MERU showing attribute primitives, object primitives, and attribute-object compositions in hyperbolic space. Dashed lines indicate mean radii. Similar to HycoCLIP, we find, objects intrinsic primitives are consistently occupy the higher radius stratum compared to attributes, except in the case of CelebA and Waterbirds. The pair embeddings themselves are significantly further away, which is consistent with the hierarchical entailment objective of these models.
Figure 6: Random compositional examples across datasets.
Compositional Zero-Shot Learning (CZSL) aims to recognize unseen attribute-object compositions by leveraging knowledge of primitive concepts learned from seen compositions. Although recent works achieve impressive performance in CZSL by leveraging large vision-language models, they primarily rely on discriminative representations that may not explicitly preserve the structured relationships between primitive concepts and their compositions. Motivated by the recent success of diffusion-based classifiers and their competitive performance relative to discriminative models, we investigate whether intermediate diffusion representations can provide complementary cues for CZSL. To this end, we propose DIFFCZSL, a diffusion-augmented framework that injects generative priors from pre-trained diffusion models into CLIP-based CZSL pipelines. We extract intermediate diffusion representations and project them into the CLIP embedding space to provide auxiliary supervision on both image and text modalities. Through contrastive alignment between CLIP embeddings and diffusion features during training, our method encourages the embedding geometry toward richer composition-aware semantics, while introducing no additional cost at inference time. Extensive experiments on three public CZSL benchmarks demonstrate consistent improvements over strong CLIP-based baselines under both closed-world and open-world settings. Our results highlight the complementary strengths of generative diffusion representations and discriminative vision-language models for compositional generalization.
Hangyu Tian, Zhenqi He, Yanghao Wang +1
The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology
Compositional generalization, the ability to recognize familiar parts in novel contexts, is a defining property of intelligent systems. Although modern models are trained on massive datasets, they still cover only a tiny fraction of the combinatorial space of possible inputs, raising the question of what structure representations must have to support generalization to unseen combinations. We formalize three desiderata for compositional generalization under standard training (divisibility, transferability, stability) and show they impose necessary geometric constraints: representations must decompose linearly into per-concept components, and these components must be orthogonal across concepts. This provides theoretical grounding for the Linear Representation Hypothesis: the linear structure widely observed in neural representations is a necessary consequence of compositional generalization. We further derive dimension bounds linking the number of composable concepts to the embedding geometry. Empirically, we evaluate these predictions across modern vision models (CLIP, SigLIP, DINO) and find that representations exhibit partial linear factorization with low-rank, near-orthogonal per-concept factors, and that the degree of this structure correlates with compositional generalization on unseen combinations. As models continue to scale, these conditions predict the representational geometry they may converge to. Code is available at https://github.com/oshapio/necessary-compositionality.
Arnas Uselis, Andrea Dittadi, Seong Joon Oh
Tübingen AI Center, University of Tübingen · Helmholtz · Technical University of Munich
Compositional Zero Shot Learning aims to recognize unseen compositions by recombining learned primitives. Recent methods rely on vision language models and attempt to explicitly model contextual variations of primitives through multiple representations. However, such approaches are limited by fixed variant capacity and competition between abstract and concrete semantics. In this work, we present a new perspective that views primitive variations as the context-driven activation of concrete visual cues rather than independent entities. Based on it, we propose CLEAR, a CLoze-style rEAsoning-based Re-ranking framework inspired by human perceptual processes. CLEAR extracts conditional variants from the primitive candidate set in a coarse-to-fine manner, performs cloze-style reasoning to infer high-level semantics, and re-ranks predictions to correct biases toward salient concrete primitives. Extensive experiments demonstrate that CLEAR consistently improves the Base Model and outperforms state-of-the-art methods on the challenging C-GQA and MIT-States datasets. Code is available at https://github.com/buptLwz/CLEAR.
Weize Li, Zhicheng Zhao, Fei Su
Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunications · Beijing Key Laboratory of Network System and Network Culture · Key Laboratory of Interactive Technology and Experience System