Back to AI News
arxiv

Probing Spatial State Representations in Visual Foundation Models

This arXiv paper investigates whether visual foundation models maintain a persistent spatial state beyond the current view. It evaluates ten representations using frozen-feature probes across four capability levels: spatial structure, object persistence, predictive spatial update, and actionability, under streaming egocentric observations of static indoor environments. Results show that strong readout of the visible scene does not guarantee accurate object persistence or future-feature retrieval, and that a spatial reader trained on real features does not transfer unchanged to predicted features. The authors also find that goal-dependent candidate selection does not establish reliable continuous action utility, while object persistence and actionability build on camera-pose readout and feature prediction builds on visible-scene readout.

AI Brief

It offers a structured evaluation of whether visual foundation models encode usable persistent spatial state, which is important for embodied and spatially aware AI systems.

arXiv:2610.40636v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: An observer sees only part of the surrounding world, yet must keep track of what lies beyond the current view. Spatial perception therefore involves more than recognizing individual images: it calls for a persistent spatial state that is updated under self-motion and used to guide action. Do visual foundation models provide representations that support such a state? We study this question through four levels of spatial capability---spatial structure, object persistence, predictive spatial update, and actionability---using frozen-feature probes on ten representations under streaming egocentric observations of static indoor environments. The resulting capability profiles vary across tasks, network layers, and prefix lengths: strong readout of the visible scene does not ensure accurate object persistence or future-feature retrieval. Matched controls separate readout accuracy from reliance on visual history and motion. Native future prediction retains recoverable spatial structure, but a spatial reader trained on real features does not transfer to predicted features unchanged. Finally, goal-dependent candidate selection does not establish reliable continuous action utility: predicted actions respond to goal changes, yet supplying the correct goal does not reliably improve progress. Across the four levels, object persistence and actionability build on camera-pose readout, whereas feature prediction builds on visible-scene readout. Together, these findings motivate evaluating spatial representations not only by what can be decoded from them, but by whether that information is maintained beyond observation, updated predictively, and used for goal-directed action.
Be the first to rate this article.

Comments & Questions (0)

Captcha
Please be respectful — let's keep the conversation friendly.

No comments yet

Be the first to comment!