Matched via arXiv identifier search
- Stars
- 14
- Last push
- Mar 8, 2026 (102d ago)
Risk flags
- No tagged releases
- No Docker setup
- Low confidence match
Yangfu Li, Hongjian Zhan, Tianyi Chen, Qi Liu, Yue Lu
Paper appears method- or tooling-adjacent to AI workflows with partial ecosystem coverage.
Existing visual token pruning methods target prompt alignment and visual preservation with static strategies, overlooking the varying relative importance of these objectives across tasks, which leads to inconsistent performance. To address this, we derive the first closed-form error bound for visual token pruning based on the Hausdorff distance, uniformly characterizing the contributions of both objectives. Moreover, ...
leveraging $ε$-covering theory, we reveal an intrinsic trade-off between these objectives and quantify their optimal attainment levels under a fixed budget. To practically handle this trade-off, we propose Multi-Objective Balanced Covering (MoB), which reformulates visual token pruning as a bi-objective covering problem. In this framework, the attainment trade-off reduces to budget allocation via greedy radius trading. MoB offers a provable performance bound and linear scalability with respect to the number of input visual tokens, enabling adaptation to challenging pruning scenarios. Extensive experiments show that MoB preserves 96.4% of performance for LLaVA-1.5-7B using only 11.1% of the original visual tokens and accelerates LLaVA-Next-7B by 1.3-1.5$\times$ with negligible performance loss. Additionally, evaluations on Qwen2-VL and Video-LLaVA confirm that MoB integrates seamlessly into advanced MLLMs and diverse vision-language tasks.
Audit each benchmark finding before selecting an implementation path. Evidence refs map to the disclosure section below.
| Task | Dataset | Metric | Value | Source | Evidence refs |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Computer vision | ( 2024 ) | MSVD | 69.8 | paper-derived | No explicit refs |
| Computer vision | Forward | Vanilla | 8.2 | paper-derived | No explicit refs |
Existing visual token pruning methods target prompt alignment and visual preservation with static strategies, overlooking the varying relative importance of these objectives across tasks, which leads to inconsistent performance.
Recommendation evidence is currently too limited for a maintained-repo choice. Use Implementation Status and Reproduction Path for a practical baseline plan.
Hardware Notes
Expect multi-day setup/compute for meaningful reproduction based on current guidance.
Evidence graph: 2 refs, 1 links.
Utility signals: depth 95/100, grounding 68/100, status medium.
Compare maintenance quality, reproducibility coverage, and evidence confidence before choosing a reproduction baseline.
Matched via arXiv identifier search
Risk flags
Matched via arXiv identifier search · Strong overlap with paper title keywords
Risk flags
There is no verified maintained implementation yet. Use this baseline plan to decide whether to prototype now or defer.
Hardware requirements
No verified implementation available
No additional verified repositories beyond the primary recommendation.
These repositories had low-confidence matching signals and are hidden by default.
No trustworthy direct or curated related Hugging Face artifacts were found yet.
Continue with targeted Hugging Face searches derived from the paper title and method context:
Datasets
Tip: start with models, then check datasets/spaces if you need evaluation data or demos.
Direct artifact matches are currently sparse. Use targeted Hugging Face searches to quickly locate candidate models, datasets, and demos.
Tasks
Computer vision
Methods
Transformer
Domains
Computer vision
Evaluation & Human Feedback Data
Open this paper in HFEPX to review benchmark signals, evaluation modes, and human-feedback protocol context.
Open in HFEPXExplore Similar Papers
Jump to Paper2Code search queries derived from this paper's research context.
Need human evaluators for your AI research? Scale annotation with expert AI Trainers.