All papersMultimodal AI

C$^2$-Routing: Complementary Cropping and Compression for Efficient Vision-Language Inference

/ Paper arXiv 2611.14469

Key numbers

36.53%C^2-Routing further reduces end-to-end FLOPs by 36.53% and visual tokens by 42.36% on average
42.36%C^2-Routing further reduces end-to-end FLOPs by 36.53% and visual tokens by 42.36% on average
0.77%with a mean relative task-score decrease of only 0.77%

From the paperCopied from the abstract, not written by AI.

Abstract

From the paperThe authors' own words.

Visual Question Answering (VQA) imposes substantial computational overhead on vision-language models (VLMs), motivating model-agnostic input reduction methods that can be readily applied across diverse VLMs, including in black-box settings. Simply enforcing a visual-token cap reduces computation, but it can discard information needed to answer the question. A single reduction strategy also struggles to accommodate different scenarios. Our key observation is that cropping and compression are complementary: cropping highlights small targets and local details, whereas whole-image compression better preserves context for large targets or distributed evidence. Based on this observation, we propose C^2-Routing, which adaptively selects cropping or compression according to the input image and question. Since both strategies may still discard key information, we further design a safety gate that uses the predicted joint correctness distribution under original and reduced inputs to guide fallback and protect accuracy. To accommodate consumer GPU resource constraints, all training and evaluation experiments run on RTX 3090 GPUs. To measure gains beyond token capping, we use full-image baselines with the same cap of 1,024 visual tokens. We conduct extensive evaluation on three VLMs and 18 datasets spanning local details, global scenes, scene text, and documents. With the visual budget already capped, C^2-Routing further reduces end-to-end FLOPs by 36.53% and visual tokens by 42.36% on average, with a mean relative task-score decrease of only 0.77%.

From the full paper

From the paperCopied from the paper itself by our code.

Reading the paper on arXiv…

Ask this paper

/ Ask a questionAnswers come from the full paper and name the section

    / Your notes

    Select text in the abstract to highlight it or add a note. They stay in this browser.

      Read the PDF