Papers › Improving One-stage Visual Grounding by Recursive Sub-query Construction

Improving One-stage Visual Grounding by Recursive Sub-query Construction

3 Aug 2020ECCV 2020 8arXiv:2008.01059archive 2025-07-28

Zhengyuan Yang, Tianlang Chen, Li-Wei Wang, Jiebo Luo

We improve one-stage visual grounding by addressing current limitations on grounding long and complex queries. Existing one-stage methods encode the entire language query as a single sentence embedding vector, e.g., taking the embedding from BERT or the hidden state from LSTM. This single vector representation is prone to overlooking the detailed descriptions in the query. To address this query modeling deficiency, we propose a recursive sub-query construction framework, which reasons between image and query for multiple rounds and reduces the referring ambiguity step by step. We show our new one-stage method obtains 5.0%, 4.5%, 7.5%, 12.8% absolute improvements over the state-of-the-art one-stage baseline on ReferItGame, RefCOCO, RefCOCO+, and RefCOCOg, respectively. In particular, superior performances on longer and more complex queries validates the effectiveness of our query modeling.

Code

Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.

Code Syntology ran Syntology

22 samples harvested; 2 ran; 1 honoured the contract we drafted; 20 have no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-24; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.

Licence: 0 of the 22 samples are pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.

Harvested from zyang-ur/ReSC. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.

Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.

Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.

Tasks

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.

Methods

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections