MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413147337 · doi:10.1109/cvpr52734.2025.01325

Magma: A Foundation Model for Multimodal AI Agents

2025· article· en· W4413147337 on OpenAlexaff
Jianwei Yang, Reuben Tan, Qianhui Wu, Ruijie Zheng, Baolin Peng, Yongyuan Liang, 裕二 池谷, Matthew Cai, Seonghyeon Ye, Joel Jang, Yunxin Deng, Jianfeng Gao

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMulti-Agent Systems and Negotiation
Canadian institutionsKootenay Association for Science & Technology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceFoundation (evidence)MagmaGeologyVolcanoHistorySeismologyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present Magma, a foundation model that serves multimodal AI agentic tasks in both the digital and physical worlds. Magma is a significant extension of vision-language (VL) models in that it not only retains the VL understanding ability (verbal intelligence) of the latter, but is also equipped with the ability to ground and act in the visual-spatial world (spatial-temporal intelligence). To endow agentic capabilities for tasks ranging from UI navigation to robot manipulation, Magma is trained on large amounts of heterogeneous datasets that span from images, videos to robotics data, where actionable visual objects (e.g. clickable buttons in GUI) in images are labeled by Set-of-Mark (SoM) for action grounding, and object movements (e.g. trace of human hands or robotic arms) in videos are labeled by Trace-of-Mark (ToM) for action planning. Extensive experiments show that SoM and ToM help bridge the gap between verbal and action abilities and significantly enhance spatio-temporal intelligence which is fundamental to agentic tasks, as shown in Fig. 1. In particular, Magma creates new state-of-the-art results on UI navigation and robotic manipulation tasks, outperforming previous models that are specifically tailored to these tasks. Moreover, Magma preserves strong multimodal understanding ability and compares favorably to popular large multimodal models that are trained on much larger datasets. We have made our model and code public for reproducibility1.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.035
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.290 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations19
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMulti-Agent Systems and NegotiationFrench-language works237,207