Multimodal Foundation Models
Overview
Multimodal foundation models study how to train systems that combine inputs such as text, images, audio, video, medical scans, and sensor data, then use them for tasks from question answering to generation and control. Common approaches connect pretrained modality-specific encoders to language models with projectors or adapters, align representations through contrastive learning, or train unified autoregressive and diffusion models to understand and generate multiple modalities. Evaluation spans visual reasoning and retrieval benchmarks, long-video and audio-visual tasks, and real-world settings such as clinical analysis, document understanding, and robotics. A central tension is that strong scores on individual tasks do not ensure grounded, consistent use of every modality, while broader capabilities also raise challenges in data quality, inference cost, robustness, and safety.
Latest papers
354 papers17 papers in the last four weeks, up 31% on the four weeks before. 0.1% of all new papers.
CLIMP: Contrastive Language-Image Mamba Pretraining
BabyVision: Visual Reasoning Beyond Language
Parameter Efficient Multimodal Instruction Tuning for Romanian Vision Language Models
OpenPhone: Mobile Agentic Foundation Models
From Charts to Code: A Hierarchical Benchmark for Multimodal Models
SRUM: Fine-Grained Self-Rewarding for Unified Multimodal Models
HunyuanImage 3.0 Technical Report
LUQ: Layerwise Ultra-Low Bit Quantization for Multimodal Large Language Models
Lavida-O: Elastic Large Masked Diffusion Models for Unified Multimodal Understanding and Generation
Reconstruction Alignment Improves Unified Multimodal Models
VMMU: A Vietnamese Multitask Multimodal Understanding and Reasoning Benchmark
Inverse-LLaVA: Rethinking Multimodal Alignment via Text-to-Vision Mapping
Position: Reasoning After Perception Means Reasoning Without Vision
Perception-then-Reasoning'' paradigm degenerates perception into a passive, one-off feature encoding process, rendering it functionally equivalent to Reasoning-in-Text-Space'', where task-critical spatial signals are collapsed before reasoning begins. We substantiate this claim with the Turing Eye Test (TET): tasks that must be resolved in visual space and are hard to verbalize; results show text-only reasoning cannot remedy these perceptual failures. Our findings suggest rethinking the architectural divide: shifting from reasoning about perception to reasoning within perception. This facilitates actively reasoning-driven perception that operates directly on pixel-level visual representations, rather than within a collapsed textual space.