Where Does Alignment Emerge and What Does It Mean? A Closer Look at the Platonic Representation Hypothesis
Abstract
Cross-modal representational alignment between unimodal language and vision models increases with model capability when captions are clean and informative, but remains below same-modality alignment and can exceed explicitly aligned vision-language models.
The Platonic Representation Hypothesis (PRH) suggests that neural networks are converging toward similar representation spaces. As language models become more capable, their representations are aligning with those of vision models. However, recent work has questioned whether this trend continues to hold for newer language models. Moreover, it has been shown that representation similarity metrics can be confounded by model depth and width, requiring appropriate baselines for interpretation. In this work, we first investigate where alignment emerges between unimodal models across model layers and representation dimensions. Next, we find that the PRH capability-alignment trend persists for newer models as long as the captions are sufficiently clean and informative. Finally, we contextualize cross-modal alignment, introducing unimodal and multimodal baselines on various datasets. Our results show that the cross-modal representational alignment of unimodal models can surpass that of explicitly aligned vision-language models, but remains substantially behind the alignment observed for models of the same modality. Code is available at https://github.com/ExplainableML/prh-closer-look.
Community
- Where does alignment emerge? In later layers (not the final ones) and within a small subspace of ~100 dimensions.
- Does the capability-alignment trend still hold? It does, but it depends on the data: with clean, informative captions, stronger language models align more closely with vision models.
- How strong is cross-modal alignment, actually? Separately trained vision and language models exceed CLIP and SigLIP 2 in neighborhood agreement, but remain far below models of the same modality.
Finding that the alignment trend returns once captions are clean and informative says a lot about what these measures really pick up. It makes me wonder how much of the earlier doubt came from noisy captions and not from the models. Did the depth and width baselines change the layer where alignment first shows up?
This is an automated message from the Librarian Bot. I found the following papers similar to this paper.
The following papers were recommended by the Semantic Scholar API
- Reading Between the Layers: Cross-Modal Alignment and Representational Hierarchy in Vision Transformers (2026)
- Proving and Improving the Platonic Representation Hypothesis with JEPAs (2026)
- Shared Geometry As A Rosetta Stone: Cross-Modal Alignment Without Paired Data (2026)
- Displacement Geometry Captures Platonic Shared Reality Across Models and Modalities (2026)
- To Align or Not To Align: Check Your COMPASS Before You Train (2026)
- What Converges in the Platonic Representation Hypothesis? Structure over Geometry (2026)
- The Platonic Brain: Representational Convergence in EEG Foundation Models (2026)
Please give a thumbs up to this comment if you found it helpful!
If you want recommendations for any Paper on Hugging Face checkout this Space
You can directly ask Librarian Bot for paper recommendations by tagging it in a comment: @librarian-bot recommend
Get this paper in your agent:
hf papers read 2611.12869 Don't have the latest CLI?
curl -LsSf https://hf.co/cli/install.sh | bash Models citing this paper 0
No model linking this paper
Datasets citing this paper 0
No dataset linking this paper
Spaces citing this paper 0
No Space linking this paper
Collections including this paper 0
No Collection including this paper