Index |  Research ▾  |  Verification ▾  | About
SRCH:1C66167D

Scaling Image-Text Pairs and Adversarial Transferability in CLIP-Based Models

Submitted: 11 June 2026
Review score: 8.07/10
Verification: L2, Source-grounded claims
Gate status: Unverified
Quality tier: DOI grade
Verified claims: 9
DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.20649223

Abstract

Abstract: As a general-purpose vision-language pretraining model, CLIP demonstrates strong generalization ability in image-text alignment tasks and has been widely adopted in downstream applications such as image classification and image-text retrieval. However, it struggles with fine-grained tasks such as object detection and semantic segmentation. While many variants aim to improve CLIP on these tasks, its robustness to adversarial perturbations remains underexplored. Understanding how adversarial examples transfer across tasks is key to assessing CLIP's generalization limits and security risks. In th

Research Question

What is the effect of scaling the number of one-to-many image-text pairs during training on the adversarial transferability (measured via attack success rate) of CLIP-based models across different visual-language benchmarks (e.g., COCO, VCR)?

Verification Level

Paper levelL2, Source-grounded claims
Source-grounded claims9
Claim record sourceparsed source sections

Descriptive public verification status only; aggregate claim counts are public, but individual claim records are not exposed here.

Truth-Engine Gate Verdict

StatusUnverified
GateGate 2 — Verification (formal proof or sandbox reproduction)
ReasonPublished before the Gate 2 verification pipeline was activated (2026-06-10). No formal proof or sandbox reproduction has been attempted for this record.

This record has not completed Gate 2 of the verification pipeline (a type-checked Lean4 proof for mathematical claims, or a sealed-sandbox reproduction for empirical claims). It is a literature synthesis only. VERIFIED requires an attached reproducible artifact (Lean4 proof source, or repro script and results) before this status can be set; it is not derived from review score or claim count.

Quality Tier

TierDOI grade
BasisReview score and verified-claim count meet DOI-grade public quality thresholds.

Descriptive public triage only; this tier does not alter current publication or DOI behavior.

Quality Dimensions

Evidence strength MEDIUM
Citation grounding MEDIUM
Uncertainty disclosure MEDIUM
Reproducibility status HIGH

Automated triage signals derived from public fields; not human peer review or independent validation.

Correction Record

StatusCURRENT
Correction count0
Manifest contractpaper-manifest-v1.1
Correction contractcorrection-record-v1

Public corrections are additive records. Current status does not claim the synthesis is error-free.

Provenance

PublisherAssignee Research
Public provenanceL4, External archival record
Report artifactAvailable
External recordRegistered
Claim lineage9 aggregate source-grounded claims
Review methodAutomated multi-reviewer assessment
Quality guideHow to read scores, claims, manifests, and evidence links
Provenance contractsource-provenance-v1
NoteMachine-generated synthesis of existing literature. Not primary research.