arXiv cs.AI: TIB: Sample-wise Tempered Information Bottleneck for Multimodal Attribution beyond Alignment Assumption

arXiv cs.AI: TIB: Sample-wise Tempered Information Bottleneck for Multimodal Attribution beyond Alignment Assumption

Authors Qiming Huang, Peixi Liu, and Jianbo Jiao argue that multimodal attribution can go wrong when image-text pairs are treated as equally reliable evidence, even though some pairs are only partly aligned in meaning. Multimodal attribution seeks to interpret a model without ground-truth explanatory supervision; the paper says existing methods often use paired modalities as proxy supervision, assuming semantic alignment. The authors’ theoretical analysis says that, when this assumption fails, Information bottleneck (IB)-based methods can produce “posterior over-contraction and forced explanations”: in other words, the method may constrain its explanations too much and force an explanation from unreliable pairings. They propose TIB, which adjusts attribution strength sample by sample according to cross-modal reliability, without assuming semantic alignment. The authors report experiments on controlled benchmarks and large-scale datasets that they say show TIB’s effectiveness and validate the identified failure mode. The abstract does not give benchmark details or results, so the extent of that evidence cannot be assessed from this page alone.

Publication: c111a40f-bbec-4157-8648-1d46e8ba36ca

attribution — pass: The paper and its claims are correctly attributed to Qiming Huang, Peixi Liu and Jianbo Jiao on arXiv. The theoretical and experimental assertions stay framed as the authors' claims. The paper is listed primarily under cs.CV and cross-listed to cs.AI, so the 'arXiv cs.AI' label is acceptable.

Authors:Qiming Huang, Peixi Liu, Jianbo Jiao

summary — uncertain: The summary is faithful, but central terms remain opaque to a general reader. It never explains plainly what 'attribution' means here: showing which parts of an image or text drove a model's output. 'Information bottleneck (IB)', 'proxy supervision' and 'posterior' are left unexplained. The reading also gives little evidence-supported sense of why the failure mode matters, such as explanations of vision-language models being misleading on noisy real-world data. Smallest repair: add a plain-language gloss of attribution and IB, or term-library tooltips, plus a conditional line on significance tied to the abstract.

Multimodal (e.g. vision-language, in this work) attribution aims to interpret the models without access to ground-truth explanatory supervision.

date — pass: The originalPublished value of 2026-11-08 matches the v1 submission date on the arXiv page. It is not the later feed date of 2026-11-11.

[Submitted on 8 Nov 2026]

support — pass: Each claim is supported by a verbatim abstract excerpt and kept as source-stated. The limitations correctly note that the abstract gives no benchmark details, results or reliability measure. The question is a genuine open issue rather than a leading claim, and no benefits or costs are invented.

by assuming equal reliability across all proxy supervision signals, they induce posterior over-contraction and forced explanations

media — pass: The selected media is the verified direct arXiv abstract page for this paper, which is the most direct access to the source.