atlas

Research map / Vision-language and multimodal / CLIP and zero-shot

Cross-Modal Few-Shot Learning with Second-Order Neural Ordinary Differential Equations

AAAI 2025 · Vision-language and multimodal › CLIP and zero-shot · approach: Attribute-based zero-shot learning · 1 citations (OpenAlex)

Read the paperCheck your idea against 108,967 papers

AI-extracted summary. Written by AI from the paper's full text. Numbers and claims can be wrong or missing context, so check the paper before you cite or build on it.

Proposes SONO, which adapts frozen CLIP features with a second-order neural ODE refiner and a text-initialized linear classifier, plus text-as-image augmentation, for few-shot recognition.

Problem

Few-shot adaptation of CLIP suffers from overfitting and the cost of prompt tuning or large-cache adapters; the paper asks whether efficient learnable modules can give strong few-shot accuracy.

Approach

Refine frozen CLIP image features with a second-order Neural ODE (via first-order state augmentation), initialize the classifier from CLIP text embeddings of class prompts so the text encoder need not run each iteration, and augment training with prompts most similar to the few-shot image prototypes ("text-as-image").

Key results

Measured effects reported in the paper

What was changedWhereMeasuredEffect
add Text-Image Augmentation (TAI) (ablation)SONO · ImageNet 16-shotaccuracy: 65.66 -> 66.37Helped
add Second-Order NODE model (SNM) (ablation)SONO with TAI · ImageNet 16-shotaccuracy: 63.26 -> 66.37Helped
remove TAI and SNM, retaining only the classifier (ablation)SONO · ImageNet 16-shotaccuracy: 66.37 -> 62.35Hurt
vary the residual ratio eta (ablation)SONO · ImageNet 16-shotaccuracy: 64.06, 65.51, 66.20, 66.37, 66.12, 65.93Mixed
use RK4 instead of Euler, AB, or ABM ODE solver (ablation)SONO · ImageNet 16-shotaccuracyHelped
use SONO rather than GraphAdapterCLIP ResNet-50 · ImageNet-V2, ImageNet-Sketch, ImageNet-A, ImageNet-R, and OOD averageaccuracy: 57.83 vs 56.58; 37.07 vs 35.89; 27.02 vs 23.07; 60.75 vs 60.86; 45.68 vs 44.10Mixed
use SONO rather than GraphAdapterCLIP ViT-B/16 · ImageNet-V2, ImageNet-Sketch, ImageNet-A, ImageNet-R, and OOD averageaccuracy: 67.33 vs 66.60; 51.15 vs 49.23; 52.96 vs 50.75; 78.88 vs 77.73; 62.58 vs 60.78Helped

Surprising findings

Limitations

Experimental setup

Datasets: ImageNet Caltech101 OxfordPets StanfordCars Flowers102 Food-101 FGVC Aircraft DTD SUN397 EuroSAT UCF101 ImageNet-V2

Benchmarks: ImageNet Caltech101 OxfordPets StanfordCars Flowers102 Food-101 FGVC Aircraft DTD SUN397 EuroSAT UCF101 ImageNet-V2

Metrics: accuracy average accuracy training time GFLOPs parameter count

Baselines: CLIP CoOp PLOT CLIP-Adapter Tip-Adapter-F TaskRes GraphAdapter

Builds on: Neural ODE CLIP CoOp Tip-Adapter CuPL

Closest papers by meaning

Writing a paper in this area? scime draft is a free LaTeX editor with AI included, real-time co-authors and a check of your references and venue rules before you submit. It also imports OpenAI Prism projects.

Open scime draft

Get the next scime Dispatch and a monthly field update

Free. We send a confirmation link first; every email has a one-click unsubscribe. Privacy