Zeeshan Khan

Haran Raajesh, Naveen Reddy Desanur, Zeeshan Khan et al.

Characters are an important aspect of any storyline and identifying and including them in descriptions is necessary for story understanding. While previous work has largely ignored identity and generated captions with someone (anonymized names), recent work formulates id-aware captioning as a fill-in-the-blanks (FITB) task, where, given a caption with blanks, the goal is to predict person id labels. However, to predict captions with ids, a two-stage approach is required: first predict captions with someone, then fill in identities. In this work, we present a new single stage approach that can seamlessly switch between id-aware caption generation or FITB when given a caption with blanks. Our model, Movie-Identity Captioner (MICap), uses a shared auto-regressive decoder that benefits from training with FITB and full-caption generation objectives, while the encoder can benefit from or disregard captions with blanks as input. Another challenge with id-aware captioning is the lack of a metric to capture subtle differences between person ids. To this end, we introduce iSPICE, a caption evaluation metric that focuses on identity tuples created through intermediate scene graphs. We evaluate MICap on Large-Scale Movie Description Challenge (LSMDC), where we show a 4.2% improvement in FITB accuracy, and a 1-2% bump in classic captioning metrics.

Darshana Saravanan, Varun Gupta, Darshan Singh et al.

A fundamental aspect of compositional reasoning in a video is associating people and their actions across time. Recent years have seen great progress in general-purpose vision or video models and a move towards long-video understanding. While exciting, we take a step back and ask: are current models good at compositional reasoning on short videos? To this end, we introduce VELOCITI, a benchmark to study Video-LLMs by disentangling and assessing the comprehension of agents, actions, and their associations across multiple events. We adopt the Video-Language Entailment setup and propose StrictVLE that requires correct classification (rather than ranking) of the positive and negative caption. We evaluate several models and observe that even the best, LLaVA-OneVision (44.5%) and Gemini-1.5-Pro (49.3%), are far from human accuracy at 93.0%. Results show that action understanding lags behind agents, and negative captions created using entities appearing in the video perform worse than those obtained from pure text manipulation. We also present challenges with ClassicVLE and multiple-choice (MC) evaluation, strengthening our preference for StrictVLE. Finally, we validate that our benchmark requires visual inputs of multiple frames making it ideal to study video-language compositional reasoning.