An 86.6M-parameter bird image encoder distilled from
BioCLIP-2 and then fine-tuned
past it. 89.93 top-1 on NABirds against the teacher's 86.41, at 3.5x fewer
visual parameters.
It is the most accurate model in the WingDex
family. It is not the one WingDex ships: at 346 MB fp32 it does not fit the
25 MB-per-file web budget, so the app runs
WingCLIP-0.3 instead.
WingCLIP-0.1's other job is to be the teacher of WingCLIP-0.3. You need this
model to reproduce 0.3.
Lineage
model
visual params
NABirds top-1
teacher
BioCLIP-2, ViT-L/14
304.0M
86.41
this model
WingCLIP-0.1, ViT-B-16
86.6M
89.93
student
WingCLIP-0.3, TinyCLIP-39M
38.7M
86.90
How a student beats its teacher
Distillation alone cannot exceed the teacher, because the teacher's embedding
is the regression target. The distill stage lands at 81.83, well short of
86.41. The gain comes from the next stage: a supervised fine-tune on
ground-truth bird photos, which adds label information BioCLIP-2 never saw.
Retention above 100% is the expected outcome of that, not an anomaly.
What it is
A ViT-B-16 visual tower whose output is projected into the 768-d BioCLIP-2
embedding space and L2-normalized. forward() is the whole exportable graph: no
text encoder runs at inference time.
Classification is a cosine similarity against a frozen 11,167 x 768 matrix
of BioCLIP-2 text embeddings, shipped here as text_classifier_fp32.npy. It is
byte-identical to the one in the 0.3 repo; both models target the same space.
Files
file
what
wingclip-0.1.pt
the released checkpoint, WiSE-FT alpha 0.90
wingclip-0.1.safetensors
the same weights, without the pickle
wingclip-0.1-alpha.pt
after distillation, before fine-tuning. NABirds 81.83
wingclip-0.1-beta.pt
after fine-tuning, before the WiSE-FT merge
text_classifier_fp32.npy
11,167 x 768 frozen BioCLIP-2 text embeddings
labels.json
11,167 rows of [common name, scientific name, eBird code], in classifier row order
No ONNX here. 0.1 is not deployed anywhere, and the exports on hand predate the
released checkpoint by enough that I could not confirm they came from it. Use
export_onnx.py in the WingDex repo if you need one.
Reconstructing the alpha sweep
The release is an exact linear interpolation of the two stages:
released = (1 - a) * alpha + a * beta # a = 0.90, verified to 0.0e+00
So wingclip-0.1-alpha.pt and wingclip-0.1-beta.pt regenerate any point on
the sweep. Measured NABirds top-1, for reference:
Preprocessing is standard CLIP at 224x224: mean
(0.48145466, 0.4578275, 0.40821073), std (0.26862954, 0.26130258, 0.27577711).
The text embeddings were built with the prompt
"a photo of {common name}, {scientific name}, a species of bird.", so keep that
template if you rebuild the classifier.
How it was trained
Distil. A LAION ViT-B-16 visual tower regresses BioCLIP-2 embeddings over
2,503,107 iNaturalist photos across 7,555 species, 20 epochs at lr 1e-4.
val cosine 0.9650, NABirds 81.83.
Fine-tune. 12 epochs of supervised fine-tuning on ground-truth photos,
lr 1e-5. In-distribution GT-val 77.61.
Merge. WiSE-FT interpolation at alpha = 0.90, giving NABirds 89.93.
The optimum sits at 0.90 where the WiSE-FT paper finds roughly 0.5, because this
fine-tune is gentle: it moves about 4.7% of the weights, mostly the projection
and the last blocks. WingCLIP-0.3's stronger fine-tune moves its optimum down to
0.60.
Quantization
NABirds, all 24,633 images.
variant
~MB
top-1
delta
fp32
346
89.94
-
fp16
173
89.94
+0.00
int8
87
89.89
-0.05
int4 block 128
43
89.06
-0.88
int3 block 128
32
0.00
collapse
int3 does not degrade, it fails outright.
Limitations
Too large for the web. 87 MB at int8 against a 25 MB-per-file cap is why
WingCLIP-0.3 exists.
Birds only. No notion of "not a bird". Feed it a dog and it returns a bird.
Low confidence means species ambiguity, not bad framing. Top-1 confidence
against relative bird area is Pearson 0.051.
North-American evaluation. NABirds is the deciding benchmark, so accuracy
elsewhere is less well characterised.
Long tail. Of 11,167 predictable species, 7,555 were distilled on. The rest
ride entirely on the text embedding of their name.
Licence and attribution
Weights are CC BY-NC 4.0. The WingDex source code is MIT, but the weights are
trained on iNaturalist photos of which 1,923,704 are CC-BY-NC, so non-commercial
propagates to the weights.
Training data: iNaturalist Open Data.
2,503,107 images, 7,555 species, 62,423 credited observers. ShareAlike-licensed
photos were excluded.
Upstream: LAION CLIP ViT-B-16
supplied the initial weights; BioCLIP-2
(MIT) was the teacher and supplies the embedding space.
Citation
WingCLIP has no paper of its own; cite the
repository and the work below. The full
bibliography is on the
WingCLIP-0.3 card; the
two that matter most here are BioCLIP 2 and WiSE-FT.
bibtex
1@inproceedings{gu2025bioclip2,
2 title = {{BioCLIP} 2: Emergent Properties from Scaling Hierarchical Contrastive Learning},
3 author = {Gu, Jianyang and Stevens, Sam and Campolongo, Elizabeth and Thompson, Matthew and Zhang, Net and Wu, Jiaman and Kopanev, Andrei and Mai, Zheda and White, Alexander and Balhoff, James and Dahdul, Wasila and Rubenstein, Daniel and Lapp, Hilmar and Berger-Wolf, Tanya and Chao, Wei-Lun and Su, Yu},
4 booktitle = {Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems},
5 volume = {38},
6 pages = {102778--102811},
7 year = {2025},
8 eprint = {2505.23883},
9 archivePrefix = {arXiv}
10}
1112@inproceedings{wortsman2022robust,
13 title = {Robust fine-tuning of zero-shot models},
14 author = {Wortsman, Mitchell and Ilharco, Gabriel and Kim, Jong Wook and Li, Mike and Kornblith, Simon and Roelofs, Rebecca and Gontijo-Lopes, Raphael and Hajishirzi, Hannaneh and Farhadi, Ali and Namkoong, Hongseok and Schmidt, Ludwig},
15 booktitle = {Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR)},
16 year = {2022},
17 eprint = {2109.01903},
18 archivePrefix = {arXiv}
19}