Papers › ConZIC: Controllable Zero-shot Image Captioning by Sampling-Based Polishing

ConZIC: Controllable Zero-shot Image Captioning by Sampling-Based Polishing

4 Mar 2023CVPR 2023 1arXiv:2303.02437archive 2025-07-28

Zequn Zeng, Hao Zhang, Zhengjue Wang, Ruiying Lu, Dongsheng Wang, Bo Chen

Zero-shot capability has been considered as a new revolution of deep learning, letting machines work on tasks without curated training data. As a good start and the only existing outcome of zero-shot image captioning (IC), ZeroCap abandons supervised training and sequentially searches every word in the caption using the knowledge of large-scale pretrained models. Though effective, its autoregressive generation and gradient-directed searching mechanism limit the diversity of captions and inference speed, respectively. Moreover, ZeroCap does not consider the controllability issue of zero-shot IC. To move forward, we propose a framework for Controllable Zero-shot IC, named ConZIC. The core of ConZIC is a novel sampling-based non-autoregressive language model named GibbsBERT, which can generate and continuously polish every word. Extensive quantitative and qualitative results demonstrate the superior performance of our proposed ConZIC for both zero-shot IC and controllable zero-shot IC. Especially, ConZIC achieves about 5x faster generation speed than ZeroCap, and about 1.5x higher diversity scores, with accurate generation given different control signals.

Code

Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.

Code Syntology ran Syntology

10 samples harvested; 3 ran; 1 honoured the contract we drafted; 7 have no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-24; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.

Licence: 0 of the 10 samples are pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.

Harvested from joeyz0z/ConZIC. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.

Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.

Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.

Tasks

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.

Methods

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections