Papers › Learning to Reason: End-to-End Module Networks for Visual Question Answering
Learning to Reason: End-to-End Module Networks for Visual Question Answering
Ronghang Hu, Jacob Andreas, Marcus Rohrbach, Trevor Darrell, Kate Saenko
Natural language questions are inherently compositional, and many are most easily answered by reasoning about their decomposition into modular sub-problems. For example, to answer "is there an equal number of balls and boxes?" we can look for balls, look for boxes, count them, and compare the results. The recently proposed Neural Module Network (NMN) architecture implements this approach to question answering by parsing questions into linguistic substructures and assembling question-specific deep networks from smaller modules that each solve one subtask. However, existing NMN implementations rely on brittle off-the-shelf parsers, and are restricted to the module configurations proposed by these parsers rather than learning them from data. In this paper, we propose End-to-End Module Networks (N2NMNs), which learn to reason by directly predicting instance-specific network layouts without the aid of a parser. Our model learns to generate network structures (by imitating expert demonstrations) while simultaneously learning network parameters (using the downstream task loss). Experimental results on the new CLEVR dataset targeted at compositional question answering show that N2NMNs achieve an error reduction of nearly 50% relative to state-of-the-art attentional approaches, while discovering interpretable network architectures specialized for each question.
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.
Tasks
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
| Task | Dataset | Model | Metric | Value | Rank at snapshot | Leaderboard | Report |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Visual Dialog | Visual Dialog v1.0 test-std | NMN | MRR (x 100) | 58.8 | #52 of 80 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Visual Dialog | Visual Dialog v1.0 test-std | NMN | Mean | 4.4 | #52 of 80 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Visual Dialog | Visual Dialog v1.0 test-std | NMN | NDCG (x 100) | 58.1 | #52 of 80 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Visual Dialog | Visual Dialog v1.0 test-std | NMN | R@1 | 44.15 | #52 of 80 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Visual Dialog | Visual Dialog v1.0 test-std | NMN | R@10 | 86.88 | #52 of 80 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Visual Dialog | Visual Dialog v1.0 test-std | NMN | R@5 | 76.88 | #52 of 80 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Visual Question Answering (VQA) | VQA v2 test-dev | N2NMN (ResNet-152, policy search) | Accuracy | 64.9 | #43 of 56 | Archive leaderboard | report |
Ranks are positions in the archive's leaderboards as they stood at the 2025-07-28 snapshot. Results published since then are not among these rows, so a rank here is not a current standing.
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