Can Motion-Language Models Ground Structure? STRIDE for Evaluating the Evaluators
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Motion-language models are typically scored by motion-language evaluators, but how well these evaluators ground language structure remains unclear. Here, we introduce the Structure grounding via Temporal-order, Reflection, and Identity Diagnostic Evaluation (STRIDE) benchmark to systematically evaluate the ability of evaluators to track temporal order, mirror reflection, and action identity. STRIDE comprises 5,869 triples, each consisting of a motion, its original caption, and a perturbed caption, spanning both short and long descriptions. We likelihood-balance caption pairs to reduce text-only bias and estimate each evaluator's caption preference under unrelated motions to measure the discrimination gain from matched motions relative to this baseline. Our experiments reveal weak structural grounding and severe deficits in mirror sensitivity among the audited evaluators, which commonly used evaluation protocols fail to expose. To understand why these limitations go undetected in standard tests, we examine the evaluators more closely. We find that text-only priors alone can solve naive perturbation tests on existing datasets, while common retrieval and distributional metrics barely respond to structural corruption introduced by mirroring ground-truth motions. These findings suggest a natural intervention: structural hard negatives. Our experiments show that a simple modification to contrastive learning substantially improves performance on temporal order and mirror reflection. The benchmark and code will be released.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 34 of its 42 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 26 Sep 2026.
Builds on
34 of 42 references.
References · 34
- 2025Qwen3-VL Technical Reportcited by 2,793
- 2016Making the V in VQA Matter: Elevating the Role of Image Understanding in Visual Question Answeringcited by 2,516
- 2022Human Motion Diffusion Modelcited by 1,080
- 2022MotionDiffuse: Text-Driven Human Motion Generation with Diffusion Modelcited by 780
- 2022When and why vision-language models behave like bags-of-words, and what to do about it?cited by 610
- 2023T2M-GPT: Generating Human Motion from Textual Descriptions with Discrete Representationscited by 588
- 2022Executing your Commands via Motion Diffusion in Latent Spacecited by 575
- 2022Winoground: Probing Vision and Language Models for Visio-Linguistic Compositionalitycited by 529
- 2023MotionGPT: Human Motion as a Foreign Languagecited by 527
- 2022TEMOS: Generating diverse human motions from textual descriptionscited by 492
- 2022MotionCLIP: Exposing Human Motion Generation to CLIP Spacecited by 408
- 2023MoMask: Generative Masked Modeling of 3D Human Motionscited by 400
22 more
- 2024TempCompass: Do Video LLMs Really Understand Videos?cited by 363
- 2022TM2T: Stochastic and Tokenized Modeling for the Reciprocal Generation of 3D Human Motions and Textscited by 359
- 2023ReMoDiffuse: Retrieval-Augmented Motion Diffusion Modelcited by 287
- 2023What's "up" with vision-language models? Investigating their struggle with spatial reasoningcited by 254
- 2023SugarCrepe: Fixing Hackable Benchmarks for Vision-Language Compositionalitycited by 243
- 2023TMR: Text-to-Motion Retrieval Using Contrastive 3D Human Motion Synthesiscited by 198
- 2022CREPE: Can Vision-Language Foundation Models Reason Compositionally?cited by 181
- 2022VL-CheckList: Evaluating Pre-trained Vision-Language Models with Objects, Attributes and Relationscited by 114
- 2024MotionLLM: Understanding Human Behaviors from Human Motions and Videoscited by 90
- 2023VITATECS: A Diagnostic Dataset for Temporal Concept Understanding of Video-Language Modelscited by 55
- 2023COLA: A Benchmark for Compositional Text-to-image Retrievalcited by 53
- 2023Test of Time: Instilling Video-Language Models with a Sense of Timecited by 51
- 2025SnapMoGen: Human Motion Generation from Expressive Textscited by 47
- 2024SUGARCREPE++ Dataset: Vision-Language Model Sensitivity to Semantic and Lexical Alterationscited by 42
- 2025MotionGPT3: Human Motion as a Second Modalitycited by 37
- 2025MG-MotionLLM: A Unified Framework for Motion Comprehension and Generation across Multiple Granularitiescited by 30
- 2023What is the Best Automated Metric for Text to Motion Generation?cited by 19
- 2024A Cross-Dataset Study for Text-based 3D Human Motion Retrievalcited by 17
- 2020Visual Chiralitycited by 14
- 2024Chronologically Accurate Retrieval for Temporal Grounding of Motion-Language Modelscited by 12
- 2025IRG-MotionLLM: Interleaving Motion Generation, Assessment and Refinement for Text-to-Motion Generationcited by 6
- 2026FineMoLA: Towards Fine-Grained Motion-Language Alignment from Clip-Level Supervisioncited by 1
Built on by
Not cited yet.