Methods for teaching machines to answer visual questions have made significant progress in the last few years, but although demonstrating impressive results on particular datasets, these methods lack some important human capabilities, including integrating new visual classes and concepts in a modular manner, providing explanations for the answer and handling new domains without new examples. In this paper we present a system that achieves state-of-the-art results on the CLEVR dataset without any questions-answers training, utilizes real visual estimators and explains the answer. The system includes a question representation stage followed by an answering procedure, which invokes an extendable set of visual estimators. It can explain the answer, including its failures, and provide alternatives to negative answers. The scheme builds upon a framework proposed recently, with extensions allowing the system to deal with novel domains without relying on training examples.
Current methods fit models to particular datasets and exploit their inherent biases, which can lead to ignoring parts of the question and the image, and to failures on novel domains @cite_9 . In contrast to the modular approach we pursue, each modification or upgrade requires a full retraining.
@cite_9
2463267937
Recently, a number of deep-learning based models have been proposed for the task of Visual Question Answering (VQA). The performance of most models is clustered around 60-70 . In this paper we propose systematic methods to analyze the behavior of these models as a first step towards recognizing their strengths and weaknesses, and identifying the most fruitful directions for progress. We analyze two models, one each from two major classes of VQA models -- with-attention and without-attention and show the similarities and differences in the behavior of these models. We also analyze the winning entry of the VQA Challenge 2016. Our behavior analysis reveals that despite recent progress, today's VQA models are "myopic" (tend to fail on sufficiently novel instances), often "jump to conclusions" (converge on a predicted answer after 'listening' to just half the question), and are "stubborn" (do not change their answers across images).