Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Can Transformers Capture Spatial Relations between Objects?

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2403.00729 v1 pith:HT7P3VVL submitted 2024-03-01 cs.CV cs.RO

classification cs.CVcs.RO
keywords spatialapproachesbenchmarkcurrentobjectsrelationrelationstask
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Spatial relationships between objects represent key scene information for humans to understand and interact with the world. To study the capability of current computer vision systems to recognize physically grounded spatial relations, we start by proposing precise relation definitions that permit consistently annotating a benchmark dataset. Despite the apparent simplicity of this task relative to others in the recognition literature, we observe that existing approaches perform poorly on this benchmark. We propose new approaches exploiting the long-range attention capabilities of transformers for this task, and evaluating key design principles. We identify a simple "RelatiViT" architecture and demonstrate that it outperforms all current approaches. To our knowledge, this is the first method to convincingly outperform naive baselines on spatial relation prediction in in-the-wild settings. The code and datasets are available in \url{https://sites.google.com/view/spatial-relation}.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Can Multimodal Large Language Models Understand Spatial Relations?

    cs.CV 2025-05 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    SpatialMQA, a new spatial-relation benchmark, shows the top MLLM reaches 48.14% accuracy versus 98.40% for humans.

Pith tools