One email each morning — yesterday's AI, sortedGet it in your inbox

METAL LAB

Dynamic Gated Cross-Modal Fusion with Sarcastic-aware Contrastive Regularization for Multimodal Sarcasm Detection

arXiv:2608.199422026-08-21

When text and image seem to agree but secretly clash, that mismatch is sarcasm — and this AI learns to spot it

AI systems that detect sarcasm in posts combining text and images often struggle when the words and picture look superficially compatible but actually contradict each other in meaning. This paper builds a framework that dynamically decides, case by case, how much to trust text versus image, and adds a contrastive learning trick that treats surface-level agreement in sarcastic posts as a trap rather than evidence of sincerity. Tested on the MMSD and MMSD2.0 benchmarks, the method consistently beat strong existing baselines.

What they did

  1. Because some sarcastic posts hinge mainly on text and others on the image, the authors built a dynamic gated fusion module that filters information from both modalities (text and image) in both directions and adjusts how much each contributes for every individual sample
  2. Since sarcastic text-image pairs often look literally aligned while meaning the opposite, the paper introduces Sarcastic-aware Contrastive Regularization (SaCR), which pushes text-image similarity up for non-sarcastic samples but pulls it down for sarcastic ones, discouraging the model from trusting misleading surface agreement
  3. Text and image features are extracted with the pretrained vision-language model CLIP, then passed through a bidirectional cross-attention mechanism that applies gates at the value level to suppress uninformative or misleading cross-modal signals
  4. The whole model is trained end-to-end with a multi-objective loss combining the final classification loss, auxiliary unimodal (text-only and image-only) classification losses, and the SaCR contrastive loss
  5. On both MMSD and MMSD2.0, the method achieved the best F1 scores among compared baselines; ablation experiments showed that removing the cross-modal interaction module or the dynamic fusion gate caused the largest performance drops
Fig. 1: Illustrative examples of surface-level consistency masking underlying incongruity in multimodal sarcasm. (a) The text ”fun” and the hospital setting are semantically compatible but sentimentally contradictory. (b) The text ”no Jesus” and the cup image share a literal subject, yet convey ironic intent. Our method aims to capture such hidden incongruity beyond literal alignment.
Fig. 1: Illustrative examples of surface-level consistency masking underlying incongruity in multimodal sarcasm. (a) The text ”fun” and the hospital setting are semantically compatible but sentimentally contradictory. (b) The text ”no Jesus” and the cup image share a literal subject, yet convey ironic intent. Our method aims to capture such hidden incongruity beyond literal alignment.
TABLE I: Statistics of MMSD and MMSD2.0 datasets
DatasetSplitTotalSarcasticNon-sarcastic
MMSDTrain19,8168,64211,174
Val2,4109591,451
Test2,4099591,450
MMSD2.0Train19,8169,57610,240
Val2,4101,0421,368
Test2,4091,0371,372
Fig. 2: Illustration of the proposed framework for multimodal sarcasm detection
Fig. 2: Illustration of the proposed framework for multimodal sarcasm detection
TABLE II: Performance of selected baselines and our method(%).
ModalityMethodMMSDMMSD2.0
Acc.%P%R%F1%Acc.%P%R%F1%
TextTextCNN80.0374.2976.3975.3271.6164.6275.2269.52
SMSD80.9076.4675.1875.8273.5668.4571.5569.97
BERT83.6078.5082.5180.4576.5274.4873.0973.91
ImageResNet64.7654.4170.8061.5365.5061.1754.3957.58
ViT67.8357.9370.0763.4072.0265.2674.8369.72
MultimodalDIP89.5987.7686.5887.1780.9678.0277.5677.79
Multi-view CLIP88.3382.6688.6585.5585.6480.3388.2484.10
MoBA88.9682.8488.1285.4085.8380.4288.6784.34
G2SAM90.4887.9589.0288.4879.4372.0478.0778.07
TFCD89.5784.8389.4388.1386.5482.4687.9584.31
DGLF89.4385.8189.2787.5186.8281.9089.8585.69
LLaVA+RAG89.9789.2689.5889.4286.4387.0086.3086.34
ESAM90.1186.8789.5488.1985.8783.1286.0584.56
GPT-5.4 (zeroshot)71.0576.5175.5071.0172.8578.7975.7872.55
Ours92.6291.9692.8292.3389.6689.3689.7489.51
Fig. 3: Example of case study and visualization.
Fig. 3: Example of case study and visualization.
TABLE III: Experiment results of ablation study (%).
VariantMMSDMMSD2.0
Acc.%F1%Acc.%F1%
Full92.6292.3389.6689.36
w/o CMI87.9187.4285.1084.97
w/o BiXAtt (only v→t)87.4887.0381.8681.70
w/o BiXAtt (only t→v)81.8481.0780.5380.37
w/o VGate92.0891.7788.7188.59
w/o DFGate90.3589.8088.3488.28
w/o SaCR91.2891.0088.5488.49
w/o UniAux91.3190.9289.1689.03

Why it matters

Any system that tries to read tone or sentiment from social media posts (content moderation, opinion analysis, chatbot responses) can badly misread intent if it misses sarcasm hidden behind superficially matching text and images, so a method that explicitly targets this failure mode has direct practical value. The insight that surface-level text-image agreement can mask contradictory intent is also relevant beyond sarcasm detection, for other multimodal understanding tasks.

Terms in this paper

  • Multimodal Sarcasm Detection (MSD) · the task of identifying sarcastic intent by jointly analyzing different types of content, such as text and images
  • CLIP · a pretrained vision-language model that maps text and images into a shared comparable space
  • gate · a learnable mechanism that controls how much of a signal passes through, using a value between 0 and 1
  • contrastive regularization · an auxiliary training technique that pulls similar representations closer and pushes dissimilar ones apart
  • Grad-CAM · a visualization technique that highlights which parts of an image a model relied on for its prediction

Original abstract (English)

Multimodal sarcasm detection aims to identify sarcastic intent from multimodal content, where inconsistencies between literal meaning and contextual cues often signal irony. This task has attracted increasing research attention. However, accurate detection remains challenging due to instance-dependent modality contributions and misleading semantic consistency, where surface-level alignment masks underlying contradictory intent. Existing methods often rely on fixed fusion strategies and treat sarcasm as generic cross-modal mismatch, limiting their ability to capture subtle sarcasm cues and instance-specific modality interactions. To address these challenges, we propose a novel MSD framework that integrates Dynamic Gated Cross-Modal Fusion with Sarcastic-aware Contrastive Regularization (SaCR). Specifically, a bidirectional gated interaction module performs cross-modal feature filtering and adaptively calibrates textual and visual contributions at the instance level. A dynamic fusion gate further balances modality importance to generate more robust multimodal representations. Furthermore, SaCR is introduced as a label-aware contrastive regularization objective that encourages semantic consistency for non-sarcastic samples while suppressing misleading consistency in sarcastic cases. The proposed framework is trained end-to-end with a multi-objective learning strategy that jointly optimizes multimodal classification and auxiliary unimodal supervision. Extensive experiments on MMSD and MMSD2.0 demonstrate that the proposed method consistently outperforms strong baselines.

Authors · Hao Guo, Subin Huang, Junjie Chen, Zhifa Geng, Sanmin Liu, Chao Kong

Read on arXiv

Latest papers

All papers →

Latest from METAL LAB

Figures: Hao Guo et al., arXiv:2608.19942, arxiv-nonexclusive