Papers › Democratizing Contrastive Language-Image Pre-training: A CLIP Benchmark of Data,...
Democratizing Contrastive Language-Image Pre-training: A CLIP Benchmark of Data, Model, and Supervision
Yufeng Cui, Lichen Zhao, Feng Liang, Yangguang Li, Jing Shao
Contrastive Language-Image Pretraining (CLIP) has emerged as a novel paradigm to learn visual models from language supervision. While researchers continue to push the frontier of CLIP, reproducing these works remains challenging. This is because researchers do not choose consistent training recipes and even use different data, hampering the fair comparison between different methods. In this work, we propose CLIP-benchmark, a first attempt to evaluate, analyze, and benchmark CLIP and its variants. We conduct a comprehensive analysis of three key factors: data, supervision, and model architecture. We find considerable intuitive or counter-intuitive insights: (1). Data quality has a significant impact on performance. (2). Certain supervision has different effects for Convolutional Networks (ConvNets) and Vision Transformers (ViT). Applying more proper supervision can effectively improve the performance of CLIP. (3). Curtailing the text encoder reduces the training cost but not much affect the final performance. Moreover, we further combine DeCLIP with FILIP, bringing us the strongest variant DeFILIP. The CLIP-benchmark would be released at: https://github.com/Sense-GVT/DeCLIP for future CLIP research.
In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.
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
Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.
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