Scene-Aware Activity Program Generation with Language Guidance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We address the problem of scene-aware activity program generation, which requires decomposing a given activity task into instructions that can be sequentially performed within a target scene to complete the activity. While existing methods have shown the ability to generate rational or executable programs, generating programs with both high rationality and executability still remains a challenge. Hence, we propose a novel method where the key idea is to explicitly combine the language rationality of a powerful language model with dynamic perception of the target scene where instructions are executed, to generate programs with high rationality and executability. Our method iteratively generates instructions for the activity program. Specifically, a two-branch feature encoder operates on a language-based and graph-based representation of the current generation progress to extract language features and scene graph features, respectively. These features are then used by a predictor to generate the next instruction in the program. Subsequently, another module performs the predicted action and updates the scene for perception in the next iteration. Extensive evaluations are conducted on the VirtualHome-Env dataset, showing the advantages of our method over previous work. Key algorithmic designs are validated through ablation studies, and results on other types of inputs are also presented to show the generalizability of our method.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".