Overview
Production Readiness
0.7
Novelty Score
0.45
Cost Impact Score
0.65
Citation Count
15
Why It Matters For Business
You can add vision, audio, or other modalities to existing LLMs cheaply by training small projectors or PEFT adapters, unlocking richer user interactions without retraining huge models.
Summary TLDR
This paper is a focused, up-to-date survey of multimodal large language models (MM-LLMs). It defines a simple five-part architecture (modality encoder, input projector, LLM backbone, output projector, modality generator), catalogs 126 recent MM-LLMs, compares 43 models across architectures and datasets, summarizes performance on common vision-language benchmarks (OKVQA, IconVQA, VQA v2, GQA), and distills practical training recipes (higher image resolution, interleaved image-text data, PEFT). The survey highlights open problems: better benchmarks, lightweight/mobile deployment, continual learning, hallucination reduction, and bias evaluation. The authors host a live tracking website: https:/
Problem Statement
How to cheaply and effectively extend text-only LLMs to handle multiple input and output modalities, and how recent MM-LLMs compare in architecture, training data, benchmarks, and practical recipes.
Main Contribution
A unified five-component architecture for MM-LLMs, clarifying where to add lightweight adapters.
A taxonomy and catalog of 126 MM-LLMs with a focused comparison table for 43 mainstream models.
A benchmark summary across 18 vision-language tasks and distilled training recipes (resolution, interleaved data, PEFT).
A short roadmap of open problems: better benchmarks, efficient/mobile models, continual learning, hallucination and bias mitigation.
Key Findings
Most MM-LLMs add small adapters while keeping the core LLM frozen.
Top MM-LLMs reach about 80% on VQA v2, but performance varies by task and dataset overlap.
Higher image resolution improves fine-grained visual tasks but increases compute and token length.
Results
Accuracy
Accuracy
Trainable parameter fraction for adapters
Who Should Care
What To Try In 7 Days
Prototype a proof-of-concept MM assistant by freezing an LLM and training a small linear projector on a 10k image-text SFT set
Measure dataset overlap before evaluating model claims on benchmarks to avoid leakage effects
Test higher visual encoder resolution (e.g., 336→448) on a dev set and track compute vs accuracy trade-off
Agent Features
Tool Use
- LLM orchestrates external expert tools (VisualChatGPT style)
Frameworks
- VisualChatGPT
- HuggingGPT
- NExT-GPT
Architectures
- tool-using (black-box LLM + external experts)
- end-to-end any-to-any multimodal
Optimization Features
Token Efficiency
- Visual token concatenation
- Multi-scale MQ-Former compression
Infra Optimization
- Use frozen LLM + small adapters to avoid full retrain compute
Model Optimization
- LoRA
System Optimization
- Keep modality encoders frozen; only train small projectors
Training Optimization
- Interleaved image-text pretraining
- SFT
Inference Optimization
- Concatenating visual tokens to reduce sequence length (MiniGPT-v2)
- Lightweight downsample projectors for mobile
Reproducibility
Data Urls
- Datasets listed (LAION, COCO, WebLI, WebVid) are publicly referenced
Data Available
Open Source Status
- partial
Risks & Boundaries
Limitations
- Survey may miss the latest models; authors maintain a live website for updates.
- Many benchmarks overlap with training data, so reported scores may overestimate real generalization.
- MM generation quality often limited by off-the-shelf modality generators (LDMs).
- Hallucination and bias remain unsolved and dataset-dependent.
When Not To Use
- When strict factual grounding is mandatory and retrieval/verification is required
- When operating on devices with very tight memory and no support for lightweight adapters
- If you need guaranteed, out-of-distribution robustness without dataset overlap checks
Failure Modes
- Modal hallucination: describing objects not present in the input
- Bias amplification from skewed multimodal training data
- Catastrophic forgetting in continual instruction tuning
- Negative forward transfer when adding new multimodal skills
Core Entities
Models
- BLIP-2
- LLaVA
- MiniGPT-4
- MiniGPT-5
- MiniGPT-v2
- InstructBLIP
- VILA
- LLaVA-1.5
- Qwen-VL
- NExT-GPT
- CoDi-2
- Emu
- Flamingo
- OpenFlamingo
- GILL
- PaLI-X
- PandaGPT
Metrics
- Accuracy
- benchmark score (aggregate)
Datasets
- LAION-5B
- COCO
- WebLI
- M3W (Interleaved)
- MMC4
- Obelics
- WebVid
- MSRVTT
- ALIGN
- DataComp
Benchmarks
- OKVQA
- IconVQA
- VQA v2
- GQA
- MMBench
- MM-Vet
- QBench
- HatefulMemes
Context Entities
Models
- GPT-4V
- Gemini
- PaLM-E
- Vicuna
- LLaMA-2
- Flan-T5
- Chinchilla
- Qwen
Metrics
- Accuracy
- MM-perception and cognition scores (MME P/C)
Datasets
- LAION-en
- CC3M
- CC12M
- Visual Genome
- MSRVTT
- TextVQA
- DocVQA
Benchmarks
- MMBench-Chinese
- SEED-Bench
- VizWiz