3.8 Proceedings Paper

ANetQA: A Large-scale Benchmark for Fine-grained Compositional Reasoning over Untrimmed Videos

Publisher

IEEE COMPUTER SOC
DOI: 10.1109/CVPR52729.2023.02221

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Building benchmarks for VideoQA models is challenging yet crucial. Current benchmarks suffer from language biases, making it difficult to diagnose model weaknesses. We present ANetQA, a large-scale benchmark that supports fine-grained compositional reasoning over untrimmed videos. ANetQA is more fine-grained than existing benchmarks, and there is room for improvement according to experiments.
Building benchmarks to systemically analyze different capabilities of video question answering (VideoQA) models is challenging yet crucial. Existing benchmarks often use non-compositional simple questions and suffer from language biases, making it difficult to diagnose model weaknesses incisively. A recent benchmark AGQA [8] poses a promising paradigm to generate QA pairs automatically from pre-annotated scene graphs, enabling it to measure diverse reasoning abilities with granular control. However, its questions have limitations in reasoning about the fine-grained semantics in videos as such information is absent in its scene graphs. To this end, we present ANetQA, a large-scale benchmark that supports fine-grained compositional reasoning over the challenging untrimmed videos from ActivityNet [4]. Similar to AGQA, the QA pairs in ANetQA are automatically generated from annotated video scene graphs. The fine-grained properties of ANetQA are reflected in the following: (i) untrimmed videos with fine-grained semantics; (ii) spatio-temporal scene graphs with fine-grained taxonomies; and (iii) diverse questions generated from fine-grained templates. ANetQA attains 1.4 billion unbalanced and 13.4 million balanced QA pairs, which is an order of magnitude larger than AGQA with a similar number of videos. Comprehensive experiments are performed for state-of-the-art methods. The best model achieves 44.5% accuracy while human performance tops out at 84.5%, leaving sufficient room for improvement.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available