Procedural Mistake Detection via Action Effect Modeling
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Mistake detection in procedural tasks is essential for building intelligent systems that support learning and task execution. Existing approaches primarily analyze how an action is performed, while overlooking what it produces, i.e., the action effect. Yet many errors manifest not in the execution itself but in the resulting outcome, such as an unintended object state or incorrect spatial arrangement. To address this gap, we propose Action Effect Modeling (AEM), a unified framework that jointly captures action execution and its outcomes through a probabilistic formulation. AEM first identifies the outcome of an action by selecting the most informative effect frame based on semantic relevance and visual quality. It then extracts complementary cues from visual grounding and symbolic scene graphs, aligning them in a shared latent space to form robust effect-aware representations. To detect mistakes, we further design a prompt-based detector that incorporates task-specific prompts and aligns each action segment with its intended execution semantics. Our approach achieves state-of-the-art performance on the EgoPER and CaptainCook4D benchmarks under the challenging one-class classification (OCC) setting. These results demonstrate that modeling both execution and outcome yields more reliable mistake detection, and highlight the potential of effect-aware representations to benefit a broader range of downstream applications.
Key facts. Cited by 5 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 28 of its 39 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 3 Dec 2025.
Builds on
28 of 39 references.
References · 28
- 2017Graph Attention Networkscited by 8,854
- 2024GPT-4o System Cardcited by 4,467
- 2021Prefix-Tuning: Optimizing Continuous Prompts for Generationcited by 3,878
- 2023Grounding DINO: Marrying DINO with Grounded Pre-Training for Open-Set Object Detectioncited by 3,274
- 2025Qwen3-VL Technical Reportcited by 2,534
- 2019Memorizing Normality to Detect Anomaly: Memory-augmented Deep Autoencoder for Unsupervised Anomaly Detectioncited by 560
- 2023EVA-02: A Visual Representation for Neon Genesiscited by 377
- 2022ActionFormer: Localizing Moments of Actions with Transformerscited by 308
- 2022Assembly101: A Large-Scale Multi-View Video Dataset for Understanding Procedural Activitiescited by 284
- 2023HoloAssist: an Egocentric Human Interaction Dataset for Interactive AI Assistants in the Real Worldcited by 159
- 2021A Hybrid Video Anomaly Detection Framework via Memory-Augmented Flow Reconstruction and Flow-Guided Frame Predictioncited by 129
- 2021Self-Supervised Predictive Convolutional Attentive Block for Anomaly Detectioncited by 119
16 more
- 2021Evidential Deep Learning for Open Set Action Recognitioncited by 96
- 2020AR-Net: Adaptive Frame Resolution for Efficient Action Recognitioncited by 88
- 2023CaptainCook4D: A Dataset for Understanding Errors in Procedural Activitiescited by 47
- 2023IndustReal: A Dataset for Procedure Step Recognition Handling Execution Errors in Egocentric Videos in an Industrial-Like Settingcited by 46
- 2023Learning Prompt-Enhanced Context Features for Weakly-Supervised Video Anomaly Detectioncited by 43
- 2024PREGO: online mistake detection in PRocedural EGOcentric videoscited by 36
- 2023Video-Mined Task Graphs for Keystep Recognition in Instructional Videoscited by 35
- 2023Learning and Verification of Task Structure in Instructional Videoscited by 26
- 2024SCHEMA: State CHangEs MAtter for Procedure Planning in Instructional Videoscited by 24
- 2023Every Mistake Counts in Assemblycited by 18
- 2024DyFADet: Dynamic Feature Aggregation for Temporal Action Detectioncited by 18
- 2023Multimodal Subtask Graph Generation from Instructional Videoscited by 13
- 2023A Coarse-to-Fine Pseudo-Labeling (C2FPL) Framework for Unsupervised Video Anomaly Detectioncited by 13
- 2025Modeling Multiple Normal Action Representations for Error Detection in Procedural Taskscited by 12
- 2024TI-PREGO: Chain of Thought and In-Context Learning for Online Mistake Detection in PRocedural EGOcentric Videoscited by 10
- 2025H-MoRe: Learning Human-centric Motion Representation for Action Analysiscited by 8
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 5.
5 papers.
- 2026The Unreasonable Effectiveness of VLMs for Zero-shot Procedural Mistake Detectioncited by 2
- 2026How to Correctly Make Mistakes: A Framework for Constructing and Benchmarking Mistake Aware Egocentric Procedural Videoscited by 1
- 2026Post-Training VLMs for Video Mistake Detectioncited by 1
- 2026PROVIA: Procedure State Tracking for Online Mistake Detection in Egocentric Videoscited by 1
- 2026Hand-Aware Transition Modeling for Bimanual Procedural Anomaly Detectioncited by 0
- 2026Hand-Aware Transition Modeling for Bimanual Procedural Anomaly Detection18 Sep 2026
- 2026PROVIA: Procedure State Tracking for Online Mistake Detection in Egocentric Videos17 Sep 2026
- 2026Post-Training VLMs for Video Mistake Detection28 Aug 2026
- 2026The Unreasonable Effectiveness of VLMs for Zero-shot Procedural Mistake Detection19 Jun 2026
- 2026How to Correctly Make Mistakes: A Framework for Constructing and Benchmarking Mistake Aware Egocentric Procedural Videos16 Apr 2026