3.8 Proceedings Paper

TAP: Text-Aware Pre-training for Text-VQA and Text-Caption

出版社

IEEE COMPUTER SOC
DOI: 10.1109/CVPR46437.2021.00864

关键词

-

资金

  1. NSF [IIS-1704337, IIS-1813709]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The paper proposes a Text-Aware Pre-training (TAP) method for Text-VQA and Text-Caption tasks, which incorporates scene text during pretraining to improve aligned representation learning among text word, visual object, and scene text modalities. Pre-trained on a large-scale OCR-CC dataset, the approach outperforms the state of the art by large margins on multiple tasks.
In this paper, we propose Text-Aware Pre-training (TAP) for Text-VQA and Text-Caption tasks. These two tasks aim at reading and understanding scene text in images for question answering and image caption generation, respectively. In contrast to conventional vision-language pretraining that fails to capture scene text and its relationship with the visual and text modalities, TAP explicitly incorporates scene text (generated from OCR engines) during pretraining. With three pre-training tasks, including masked language modeling (MLM), image-text (contrastive) matching (ITM), and relative (spatial) position prediction (RPP), pre-training with scene text effectively helps the model learn a better aligned representation among the three modalities: text word, visual object, and scene text. Due to this aligned representation learning, even pre-trained on the same downstream task dataset, TAP already boosts the absolute accuracy on the TextVQA dataset by +5.4%, compared with a non-TAP baseline. To further improve the performance, we build a large-scale scene text-related imagetext dataset based on the Conceptual Caption dataset, named OCR-CC, which contains 1.4 million images with scene text. Pre-trained on this OCR-CC dataset, our approach outperforms the state of the art by large margins on multiple tasks, i.e., +8.3% accuracy on TextVQA, +8.6% accuracy on ST-VQA, and +10.2 CIDEr score on TextCaps.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据