← 研踪 PaperTrailarXiv:2611.16581 · v1
Do the Details Help the Whole? One-Way Transfer from Person Actions to Group Intent in VLMs on JRDB-Social
首次提交 2026-11-12 18:14
版本更新 2026-11-12 18:14
雷达观测 2026-11-13 14:15
摘要
Social scene datasets label people at two levels: what each person is doing and what the group is there for. Training on both levels at once is often assumed to help each of them. We test this assumption for vision-language models (VLMs) on JRDB-Social, treating person actions as the details and group intent as the whole. We fine-tune Qwen3.5 4B under eight training arms with three seeds, repeat the core arms on Qwen3.5 9B and Qwen3-VL 4B, and judge every arm with a verdict rule fixed before testing. Writing each member's actions before the intent raises intent macro-F1 from 30.1 to 31.0, and writing the intent first reaches 31.2, while action F1 stays within 0.2 points of an action-only model. Under the selected recipe, no arm trained with intent improves actions. The gain requires correct, image-grounded actions: empty action lists or actions borrowed from another group with the same intent lower intent F1. Forced-prefix tests, occlusion, member masking, linear probes and component grafting show that the intent follows the written actions, relies more on people and partly resides in the vision tower. Supplying actions as input instead of as targets hurts both levels.
观测到的版本
相邻记录可能跳过中间版本；首次发现 v2 及以上也会标为版本更新。
v1 · 2026-11-12 18:14 · 最新观测版本
Do the Details Help the Whole? One-Way Transfer from Person Actions to Group Intent in VLMs on JRDB-Social
Social scene datasets label people at two levels: what each person is doing and what the group is there for. Training on both levels at once is often assumed to help each of them. We test this assumption for vision-language models (VLMs) on JRDB-Social, treating person actions as the details and group intent as the whole. We fine-tune Qwen3.5 4B under eight training arms with three seeds, repeat the core arms on Qwen3.5 9B and Qwen3-VL 4B, and judge every arm with a verdict rule fixed before testing. Writing each member's actions before the intent raises intent macro-F1 from 30.1 to 31.0, and writing the intent first reaches 31.2, while action F1 stays within 0.2 points of an action-only model. Under the selected recipe, no arm trained with intent improves actions. The gain requires correct, image-grounded actions: empty action lists or actions borrowed from another group with the same intent lower intent F1. Forced-prefix tests, occlusion, member masking, linear probes and component grafting show that the intent follows the written actions, relies more on people and partly resides in the vision tower. Supplying actions as input instead of as targets hurts both levels.
查看此版本解读 →查看此版本原文 ↗