GePSAn: Generative Procedure Step Anticipation in Cooking Videos
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We study the problem of future step anticipation in procedural videos. Given a video of an ongoing procedural activity, we predict a plausible next procedure step described in rich natural language. While most previous work focuses on the problem of data scarcity in procedural video datasets, another core challenge of future anticipation is how to account for multiple plausible future realizations in natural settings. This problem has been largely overlooked in previous work. To address this challenge, we frame future step prediction as modelling the distribution of all possible candidates for the next step. Specifically, we design a generative model that takes a series of video clips as input, and generates multiple plausible and diverse candidates (in natural language) for the next step. Following previous work, we side-step the video annotation scarcity by pretraining our model on a large text-based corpus of procedural activities, and then transfer the model to the video domain. Our experiments, both in textual and video domains, show that our model captures diversity in the next step prediction and generates multiple plausible future predictions. Moreover, our model establishes new state-of-the-art results on YouCookII, where it outperforms existing baselines on the next step anticipation. Finally, we also show that our model can successfully transfer from text to the video domain zero-shot, i.e., without fine-tuning or adaptation, and produces good-quality future step predictions from video.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 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 it