Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This paper investigates the impact of evolving LLM backbones (LLaMA-1, LLaMA-2, LLaMA-3) on downstream VLM task performance while keeping the vision encoder, training data, and post-training algorithm constant. The study reveals that newer LLM backbones don't consistently improve VLM performance across all tasks, with improvements being task-dependent. Specifically, newer LLMs in VLMs tend to solve different visual question answering tasks, driven by better calibrated confidence and more stable internal representations, while tasks relying on visual understanding show little benefit.
Swapping in the latest LLM backbone doesn't guarantee a better VLM – sometimes it just solves *different* problems.
Vision-Language Models (VLMs) have rapidly advanced by leveraging powerful pre-trained Large Language Models (LLMs) as core reasoning backbones. As new and more capable LLMs emerge with improved reasoning, instruction-following, and generalization, there is a pressing need to efficiently update existing VLMs to incorporate these advancements. However, the integration of new LLMs into VLMs, particularly how the evolving LLMs contribute to multimodal reasoning, alignment, and task-specific performance remains underexplored. Addressing this gap is important for VLM development, given the rapid evolution of pretrained LLM backbones. This study presents a controlled and systematic investigation of how changes in the pretrained LLM backbone affect downstream VLM task performance. By having the vision encoder, training data, and post-training algorithm remain same across LLAMA-1, LLAMA-2, and LLAMA-3 based VLMs, we find that newer LLM backbones do not always lead to better VLMs, but the performance depends on the downstream VLM task. For example, in visual question and answering tasks, newer LLM backbones tend to solve different questions rather than just more questions, and our analysis shows this is driven by differences in how the models process information, including better calibrated confidence and more stable internal representations. We also find that some VLM capabilities appear only in the newest LLM generation, while tasks that depend mainly on visual understanding see little benefit from a newer LLM backbone.
