# KPL: Training-Free Medical Knowledge Mining of Vision-Language Models Source: [KPL: Training-Free Medical Knowledge Mining of Vision-Language Models]() Collection index: [llms.txt]() Data updated: 2025-10-26T04:00:18.171Z Authors: Jiaxiang Liu, Tianxiang Hu, Jiawei Du, Ruiyuan Zhang, Joey Tianyi Zhou, Zuozhu Liu Published: 2025-01-20T02:31:00.000Z ## Abstract Visual Language Models such as CLIP excel in image recognition due to extensive image-text pre-training. However, applying the CLIP inference in zero-shot classification, particularly for medical image diagnosis, faces challenges due to: 1) the inadequacy of representing image classes solely with single category names; 2) the modal gap between the visual and text spaces generated by CLIP encoders. Despite attempts to enrich disease descriptions with large language models, the lack of class-specific knowledge often leads to poor performance. In addition, empirical evidence suggests that existing proxy learning methods for zero-shot image classification on natural image datasets exhibit instability when applied to medical datasets. To tackle these challenges, we introduce the Knowledge Proxy Learning (KPL) to mine knowledge from CLIP. KPL is designed to leverage CLIP's multimodal understandings for medical image classification through Text Proxy Optimization and Multimodal Proxy Learning. Specifically, KPL retrieves image-relevant knowledge descriptions from the constructed knowledge-enhanced base to enrich semantic text proxies. It then harnesses input images and these descriptions, encoded via CLIP, to stably generate multimodal proxies that boost the zero-shot classification performance. Extensive experiments conducted on both medical and natural image datasets demonstrate that KPL enables effective zero-shot image classification, outperforming all baselines. These findings highlight the great potential in this paradigm of mining knowledge from CLIP for medical image classification and broader areas. ## Recorded benchmark results A research result applies to its stated dataset, split, metric and evaluation configuration. Compare like-for-like settings, preserve the metric's unit and direction, and distinguish paper-reported results from independent reproduction. The best result recorded here is not a claim of exhaustive, current global coverage. ## Original sources and implementation [Original paper]() [PDF]()