Attention, Please! Revisiting Attentive Probing Through the Lens of Efficiency
About
As fine-tuning becomes impractical at scale, probing is emerging as the preferred evaluation protocol. However, standard linear probing can understate the capability of models whose pre-training optimizes local representations rather than an explicit global representation. This motivates attentive probing, an alternative that uses attention to selectively aggregate patch-level features. Despite growing adoption, attentive probing is still underexplored: existing approaches are often over-parameterized and computationally inefficient. In this work, we revisit attentive probing through the lens of the accuracy vs. parameter-efficiency trade-off. We present the first comprehensive study of existing methods, analyzing their design choices and benchmarking their performance. Building on these insights, we propose efficient probing (EP), a lightweight yet effective multi-query cross-attention mechanism that eliminates redundant projections and reduces the number of trainable parameters. Across multiple benchmarks and pre-training paradigms, EP consistently outperforms linear probing and previous attentive probing methods, and remains effective when combined with parameter-efficient fine-tuning. Beyond evaluation, our analysis uncovers emerging properties of EP, including complementary attention maps, which open new directions for leveraging probing beyond protocol design. Project page: https://vrg.fel.cvut.cz/ep/.
Related benchmarks
| Task | Dataset | Result | Rank | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Image Classification | ImageNet 1k (10% labels) | Top-1 Acc65.2 | 92 | |
| Image Classification | ImageNet-1K | -- | 30 | |
| Image Classification | ImageNet 1k (test) | -- | 28 | |
| Image Retrieval | CUB-200 (test) | R@180.3 | 26 | |
| Unsupervised Object Localization | ImageNet-1K | MaxBoxAccV263.7 | 14 | |
| Zero-shot image retrieval | CARS196 (test) | Recall@190.4 | 10 | |
| k-NN Image Classification | StanfordCars | Accuracy70 | 7 | |
| k-NN Image Classification | Food101 | Accuracy75.2 | 7 | |
| Image Classification | ImageNet 1k (5% subset) | Top-1 Acc60.9 | 3 |