Papers › Soft-Prompting with Graph-of-Thought for Multi-modal Representation Learning

Soft-Prompting with Graph-of-Thought for Multi-modal Representation Learning

6 Apr 2024arXiv:2404.04538archive 2025-07-28

Juncheng Yang, Zuchao Li, Shuai Xie, Wei Yu, Shijun Li, Bo Du

The chain-of-thought technique has been received well in multi-modal tasks. It is a step-by-step linear reasoning process that adjusts the length of the chain to improve the performance of generated prompts. However, human thought processes are predominantly non-linear, as they encompass multiple aspects simultaneously and employ dynamic adjustment and updating mechanisms. Therefore, we propose a novel Aggregation-Graph-of-Thought (AGoT) mechanism for soft-prompt tuning in multi-modal representation learning. The proposed AGoT models the human thought process not only as a chain but also models each step as a reasoning aggregation graph to cope with the overlooked multiple aspects of thinking in single-step reasoning. This turns the entire reasoning process into prompt aggregation and prompt flow operations. Experiments show that our multi-modal model enhanced with AGoT soft-prompting achieves good results in several tasks such as text-image retrieval, visual question answering, and image recognition. In addition, we demonstrate that it has good domain generalization performance due to better reasoning.

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

9 samples harvested; 7 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 2 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 9 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 shishicode/agot. “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.

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