arXivDaily arXiv每日学术速递 周一至周五更新
arXiv 2610.17844cs.CV
收藏

多模态大语言模型(MLLMs)空间理解的优质视觉表征是什么?

What Makes a Good Visual Representation for Spatial Understanding in MLLMs?

The University of Hong Kong(香港大学)

Xiaohu Huang, Yumin Guo, Kai Han

AI总结:

该研究探究MLLMs空间理解的优质视觉表征,将迁移内容与方式分离,发现3D结构及表征形式影响效果,据此构建的单MLLM在空间推理基准上优于基础模型。

摘要:

空间理解是推动多模态大语言模型(MLLMs)对3D物理世界进行推理的必要步骤。然而,MLLMs的视觉预训练数据几乎全为2D,因此其处理的视觉令牌往往缺乏内在的3D结构信息。越来越多的方法通过从外部视觉或几何模型迁移表征来注入此类结构,这些方法共同证实这种迁移是有帮助的。但这些方法背后存在一个尚未充分探索的问题:什么样的视觉表征对空间理解是优质的?为回答该问题,我们首先将迁移的内容与迁移的方式分开,再将产生的差异追溯到表征本身的属性。我们迁移的内容来自3D几何模型、自监督图像与视频模型、视觉-语言模型以及生成模型,形式为潜在特征或显式深度与点云图。我们通过两种方式进行迁移:一是蒸馏,将其作为监督目标;二是融合,将其作为额外输入。我们发现,表征的3D结构与其帮助程度密切相关,衡量指标包括潜在特征的跨视图一致性,以及显式几何的深度与重建精度。我们进一步表明,表征的形式决定了其所需的机制:潜在特征从融合中获得的收益与从蒸馏中获得的收益相当;显式几何从融合中获得的收益极少,其大部分蒸馏收益依赖于几何解码头。基于这些发现,我们将潜在特征与显式几何都蒸馏到单个MLLM中,该模型仅以RGB视频作为输入,在静态3D与动态4D空间推理基准上均持续优于其基础模型。

英文摘要:

Spatial understanding is a necessary step in moving multimodal large language models (MLLMs) toward reasoning about the 3D physical world. Their visual pretraining data, however, is almost entirely 2D, so the visual tokens processed by MLLMs often lack inherent 3D structural information. A growing number of methods inject such structure by transferring representations from external vision or geometry models, and collectively establish that such transfer helps. Behind these methods lies a largely underexplored question: what makes a visual representation good for spatial understanding? To answer it, we first separate what is transferred from how it is transferred, and then trace the resulting differences back to properties of the representations themselves. What we transfer comes from 3D geometry models, self-supervised image and video models, vision-language models, and generative models, in the form of latent features or explicit depth and point maps. We transfer it either by distillation, using it as a supervision target, or by fusion, feeding it as an additional input. We find that a representation's 3D structure correlates strongly with how much it helps, measured by cross-view consistency for latent features and by depth and reconstruction accuracy for explicit geometry. We further show that the form of a representation dictates the mechanism it needs. Latent features gain as much from fusion as from distillation; explicit geometry gains little from fusion, and most of its distillation gain depends on a geometry decoding head. Guided by these findings, we distill both latent features and explicit geometry into a single MLLM. Taking only RGB video as input, it consistently improves over its base model on both static 3D and dynamic 4D spatial reasoning benchmarks.

机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来,可能存在错误,请以论文正文为准。

↑