Skip to content
AI News HubLIVE
Original source3 min read

GAVAGAI: Referential Alignment for Infant-Scale Vision-Language Models via Balanced Optimal Transport

Summary

GAVAGAI introduces a referential alignment loss using balanced optimal transport, allowing words to map to nothing and enforcing capacity constraints on regions. It improves word-to-picture accuracy on simulated and SAYCam infant video data, but the authors note it does not set a new state of the art.

SourcearXiv Computational LinguisticsAuthor: Rajdeep Pal, Jotiraditya Banerjee, Saptarshi Pani
GAVAGAI: Referential Alignment for Infant-Scale Vision-Language Models via Balanced Optimal Transport
Report an error

The correction channel is not available yet. You can copy the article reference below for later.

Correction instructions
Read article

[Submitted on 30 Oct 2026]

Title:GAVAGAI: Referential Alignment for Infant-Scale Vision-Language Models via Balanced Optimal Transport

View a PDF of the paper titled GAVAGAI: Referential Alignment for Infant-Scale Vision-Language Models via Balanced Optimal Transport, by Rajdeep Pal and 2 other authors

View PDF HTML (experimental)

Abstract:A child learns which words name which things from roughly 100 million words of input. Vision-language models trained at a comparable scale bind words to referents far less reliably, and we argue that part of the gap is structural: the usual next-token captioning objective has no variable standing for "this word refers to that region," so training applies no direct pressure to ground words. We add such a variable by treating each scene as a small assignment problem between the content words heard and the regions seen, solved as entropic optimal transport under two constraints. First, a word may be assigned to a special NOTHING column instead of any region, which matters because most content words in caregiver speech do not name anything visible. Second, no region may receive more than a bounded share of the assignment mass, a capacity constraint that encodes mutual exclusivity. The alignment step costs about eight Sinkhorn iterations, small next to the vision encoder. In controlled simulation, the naive version of the idea, a row-wise softmax that forces every word onto some region, collapses to 0.000 word-to-picture accuracy under realistic non-reference rates, below the 0.058 of captioning alone, while our two constraints reach 0.075 in that regime and 0.700 on clean input. A one-parameter version of the model reproduces adult cross-situational learning accuracy across three ambiguity conditions (RMSE 0.024). On the SAYCam infant video corpus, adding the alignment loss to a next-token captioning model raises word-to-picture accuracy from 32.4% to 48.7% and localization IoU from 0.18 to 0.38. A contrastive model trained on the same child's data remains stronger on its own benchmark, so our claim is that the loss improves a captioning objective under high non-reference rates, not that it sets a new best.

Comments: Accepted in NeuriPs 2026 workshop "The BabyVLM Workshop Toward Developmentally Plausible Multimodal Systems"

Subjects:

Computation and Language (cs.CL)

Cite as: arXiv:2611.00319 [cs.CL]

(or arXiv:2611.00319v1 [cs.CL] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2611.00319

arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

Submission history

From: Rajdeep Pal [view email] [v1] Fri, 30 Oct 2026 19:39:12 UTC (18 KB)

Full-text links:

Access Paper:

View a PDF of the paper titled GAVAGAI: Referential Alignment for Infant-Scale Vision-Language Models via Balanced Optimal Transport, by Rajdeep Pal and 2 other authors

View PDF

HTML (experimental)

TeX Source

view license

Additional Features

Audio Summary

Current browse context:

cs.CL

new | recent | 2026-11

Change to browse by:

cs

References & Citations

SciX

Google Scholar

Semantic Scholar

Loading...

Data provided by:

Bibliographic Tools

Bibliographic and Citation Tools

Bibliographic Explorer Toggle

Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?)

Connected Papers Toggle

Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?)

Litmaps Toggle

Litmaps (What is Litmaps?)

scite.ai Toggle

scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?)

Code, Data, Media

Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article

alphaXiv Toggle

alphaXiv (What is alphaXiv?)

Links to Code Toggle

CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers (What is CatalyzeX?)

DagsHub Toggle

DagsHub (What is DagsHub?)

GotitPub Toggle

Gotit.pub (What is GotitPub?)

Huggingface Toggle

Hugging Face (What is Huggingface?)

ScienceCast Toggle

ScienceCast (What is ScienceCast?)

Demos

Demos

Replicate Toggle

Replicate (What is Replicate?)

Spaces Toggle

Hugging Face Spaces (What is Spaces?)

Spaces Toggle

TXYZ.AI (What is TXYZ.AI?)

Related Papers

Recommenders and Search Tools

Link to Influence Flower

Influence Flower (What are Influence Flowers?)

Core recommender toggle

CORE Recommender (What is CORE?)

Author

Venue

Institution

Topic

About arXivLabs

arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Which authors of this paper are endorsers? | Disable MathJax (What is MathJax?)

Key points and analysis

Article intelligence

EngineersAdvanced

Key points

  • The method adds an explicit word-region assignment variable to the standard next-token captioning objective.
  • Two constraints—a NOTHING column and a capacity limit—prevent collapse under high non-reference rates, achieving 0.075 accuracy versus 0.000 for naive softmax.
  • On SAYCam infant video corpus, adding the alignment loss boosts word-to-picture accuracy from 32.4% to 48.7% and localization IoU from 0.18 to 0.38.
  • A contrastive model remains stronger on its own benchmark, so the contribution is improving captioning under high non-reference rates.

Highlights and analysis are generated automatically and may contain errors. Check the original source.