arXiv AI

Can Vision-Language Models Judge Olympic Diving? From Reasoning to Scores in Zero-Shot Action Quality Assessment

The paper investigates whether open‑source Vision‑Language Models (VLMs) can perform zero‑shot action quality assessment (AQA) on Olympic diving videos. Using the AQA‑7 benchmark, the authors propose a regression framework that combines VLM‑generated semantic reasoning, phase‑level sub‑scores, TF‑IDF vectorization, dimensionality reduction, and ensemble learning to predict final competition scores. While individual VLMs achieve moderate Spearman correlations (<0.32), the ensemble approach boosts performance to 0.67, demonstrating that VLM‑derived textual reasoning features are more informative than raw numerical sub‑scores for AQA. whyItMatters":"The study shows that VLMs can serve as explainable, semi‑automated tools for evaluating sports performance, potentially aiding expert judging in complex, subjective Olympic events."

arXiv AI
2d ago

VisionQ: VLM-as-a-Judge Taxonomy, Dataset and Benchmark for Qualitative Analysis in Computer Vision

VisionQ is a new benchmark for qualitative analysis in computer vision that evaluates vision‑language models (VLMs) on criterion‑conditioned visual discrimination. It is built from over 1,800 peer‑reviewed comparison figures in CVPR and ICCV papers, linking each image crop to author‑stated visual claims through 3,911 hand‑annotated data points. The benchmark includes a 51‑leaf taxonomy of visual criteria, a protocol that hides method identities and reports accuracy per criterion, and a DPO‑tuned Gemma‑4‑E4B judge that improves accuracy on a held‑out test set.

By Vu Dinh Xuan, Duc-Hai Nguyen, Minh-Dung Dao, Vu Quynh Giao, Quang Hong Nguyen, Binh-Son Hua, Barry O'Sullivan, David Murphy, Hoang D. Nguyen
Hugging Face Trending Papers
Jun 3

NextMotionQA: Benchmarking and Judging Human Motion Understanding with Vision-Language Models

Reliable evaluation of human motion understanding is fundamental to advancing embodied AI, robotics, and animation. However, existing benchmarks suffer from coarse semantic granularity, undifferentiated difficulty, limited annotation quality, and pervasive answer ambiguity, leaving them unable to diagnose where current models fail.

arXiv AI
Jul 17

SportD: Can VLMs Physically Strategize?

arXiv:2607. 14616v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Vision--language models have become increasingly capable of interpreting visual scenes, but it remains unclear whether they can use information to make strategically effective decisions.

By Jasin Cekinmez, Addison J. Wu, Haotian Xia, Akshaya Bharadhwaj, Anay Putty, Anirudh Ravishankar, Jaewoong Lee, Jinglin Xiao, Kyumin Andrew Shim, Mishika Ahuja, Nisarga Patil, Leo Liu, Zhuohan Liu, Weining Shen
arXiv AI
Aug 6

The First EgoCross Challenge at EgoVis 2026: Cross-Domain Egocentric Video Question Answering

arXiv:2608. 04589v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: EgoCross is a cross-domain egocentric video question answering benchmark designed to evaluate whether multimodal large language models can generalize beyond common daily-life scenarios.

By Yuqian Fu, Tianwen Qian, Yanjun Li, Yu Li, Kunyu Peng, Xu Zheng, Yongqin Xian, Alessio Tonioni, Yanwei Fu, Xiaoling Wang, Danda Paudel, Federico Tombari, Luc Van Gool, Leyi Wu, Yifan Zhao, Jinjie Zhang, Yinchuan Li, Yingcong Chen, Zixu Li, Zhiwei Chen, Zhiheng Fu, Wenbo Wang, Yupeng Hu, Weili Guan, Liqiang Nie, Takuya Murakawa, Toru Tamaki, Yi Wen, Zhenglin Du, Zhengyang Li, Lingling Li, Licheng Jiao, Wenping Ma
arXiv Computer Vision
Sep 4

WorldReward: Reward Modeling for Camera-Conditioned World Models

WorldReward introduces a vision‑language model–based reward system for camera‑conditioned world models, combining action consistency and visual quality evaluation. It processes paired videos by splitting them into action‑aligned chunks, structuring visual evidence, and aggregating decisions through voting. The model is trained on a large, reasoning‑augmented preference dataset and outperforms GPT‑5.5 on a human‑annotated benchmark, improving both action execution and visual quality when applied to RL post‑training.

By Yibin Wang, Zehan Wang, Junshu Tang, Zhimin Li, Yujie Zhou, Jiazi Bu, Pengyang Ling, Feng Han, Zhixiong Zhang, Long Xing, Shengyuan Ding, Ziang Li, Cheng Jin, Yuhang Zang, Jiaqi Wang, Tianyu Pang