๊ฐ€์ž… ํ›„ ์ดˆ๋Œ€ ๋งํฌ๋ฅผ ๊ณต์œ ํ•˜๋ฉด ๋™์˜์ƒ ์žฌ์ƒ ๋ฐ ์ดˆ๋Œ€ ๋ณด์ƒ์„ ๋ฐ›์„ ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ์Šต๋‹ˆ๋‹ค.

cv usk
@cv_usk
AI / Software Research Notes AI Agent, LLMOps, MLOps, Software Architecture ๆŠ•็จฟใฏๅ€‹ไบบใฎๆ„่ฆ‹ใงใ™ใ€‚
๊ฐ€์ž… May 2026
284 ํŒ”๋กœ์ž‰ ์ค‘    449 ํŒฌ
Video AI turns out to be surprisingly bad at pointing to "when and where," even when it can answer the question itself. Title: OmniCompass: A Holistic Benchmark for Omni-Modal Video Grounding and Understanding URL: ๐Ÿ’ก Overview Researchers from Hong Kong Polytechnic University and OPPO Research Institute introduce OmniCompass, a new holistic benchmark for video understanding, evaluating 50 models on temporal/spatial grounding and question answering on the same footing. ๐ŸŽฏ The problem Existing benchmarks cover either vision-only or audio-visual evidence, test either QA or grounding but rarely both, and had no way to check whether a model's predictions actually agree when the target is specified by text alone versus text plus a reference image. ๐Ÿงช The method Across 820 videos (80.6 hours, 7 domains, 52 subcategories), each clip gets a matched Text setting and Text+Image setting sharing the same target and ground truth. Two tracks, OmniCompass-VL for vision-language models and OmniCompass-AV for omni-modal models, each evaluate three unified tasks: temporal grounding (TG), spatial grounding (SG), and QA. A new Cross-Specification Consistency (CS) score measures how well predictions agree between the two settings. ๐Ÿ“Š Results QA reaches up to 69.1% (VL) and 78.2% (AV), while temporal grounding tops out at just 27.1% (VL) and 40.6% (AV), exposing a huge gap between answering and pointing. The best open-source model also trails the best proprietary model, Gemini-3.8-Flash, by 32.8 points on CS average in the AV track (24.6% vs. 57.4%). #VideoAI# #Benchmarks#
๋” ๋ณด๊ธฐ