Despite the impressive advancements achieved through vision-and-language pretraining, it remains unclear whether multi-modal learning can help understand each individual modality. In this work, we conduct a comparative analysis of the visual representations in existing vision-and-language models and vision-only models by probing on a broad range of tasks. Five probing tasks are evaluated in order to assess the quality of the learned representations in a nuanced manner. Our results on five probing tasks suggest vision-and-language models are better at label prediction tasks like object and attribute prediction, while vision-only models are stronger at dense prediction tasks that require more localized information. We hope our study sheds light on the role of language in visual learning, and serves as an empirical guide for various pretrained models.

Our commonsense knowledge about objects includes their typical visual attributes; we know that bananas are typically yellow or green, and not purple. Text and image corpora, being subject to reporting bias, represent this world-knowledge to varying degrees of faithfulness. In this paper, we investigate to what degree unimodal (language-only) and multimodal (image and language) models capture a broad range of visually salient attributes. To that end, we create the Visual Commonsense Tests (ViComTe) dataset covering 5 property types (color, shape, material, size, and visual co-occurrence) for over 5000 subjects. We validate this dataset by showing that our grounded color data correlates much better than ungrounded text-only data with crowdsourced color judgments provided by Paik et al. (2021). We then use our dataset to evaluate pretrained unimodal models and multimodal models. Our results indicate that multimodal models better reconstruct attribute distributions, but are still subject to reporting bias. Moreover, increasing model size does not enhance performance, suggesting that the key to visual commonsense lies in the data.