LLoVi

This is official implementation for paper: A Simple LLM Framework for Long-Range Video Question-Answering.

Installation

Install environment.

Python 3.8 or above is required.

git clone [email protected]:CeeZh/LLoVi.git
cd LLoVi

python3 -m venv llovi_env
source activate llovi_env/bin/activate
pip install openai
pip3 install torch torchvision torchaudio --index-url https://download.pytorch.org/whl/cu118
pip install pandas
pip install transformers
pip install accelerate

Download dataset annotations and extracted captions.

Download data.zip from https://drive.google.com/file/d/13M10CB5ePPVlycn754_ff3CwnpPtDfJA/view?usp=drive_link

unzip data.zip

We provide extracted captions for EgoSchema, NeXT-QA, NeXT-GQA and IntentQA at ./data. It also contains dataset annotations.

We used LaViLa base model to extract EgoSchema captions at 1 FPS, LLaVA (llava-hf/llava-1.5-13b-hf) to extract captions for other datasets at 0.5 FPS.

Note that LaViLa is trained on Ego4D, which has overlap with EgoSchema. To avoid data leakage, we trained LaViLa using videos that are not in EgoSchema. You can download the model from this link.

Download experiment results.

Download output.zip from https://drive.google.com/file/d/1d7a-FuQzdfQ7ZAzU5Y8HJpog1gm_sye_/view?usp=drive_link

unzip output.zip

The result files are generated by running the commands in next sections. Note that the result files will be detected, so the commands in next sections will not run directly. Add --start_from_scratch to run the commmands one more time.

EgoSchema

Captioner

# LaViLa
python main.py --output_base_path output/egoschema --output_filename standard_qa.json --api_key YOUR_OPENAI_KEY

# BLIP-2
python main.py --data_path data/egoschema/blip2_fullset.json --output_base_path output/egoschema --output_filename standard_qa_blip2.json --api_key YOUR_OPENAI_KEY

Captioner	LLM	Prompt	Accuracy
LaViLa	gpt-3.5-turbo	standard	51.2
BLIP-2	gpt-3.5-turbo	standard	47.4

LLM

# gpt-3.5-turbo
python main.py --output_base_path output/egoschema --output_filename standard_qa.json --api_key YOUR_OPENAI_KEY

# gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
python main.py --model gpt-3.5-turbo-1106 --output_base_path output/egoschema --output_filename standard_qa_1106.json --api_key YOUR_OPENAI_KEY

# llama2 70B
python main.py --model meta-llama/Llama-2-70b-chat-hf --prompt_type qa_standard_llama --output_base_path output/egoschema --output_filename llama.json

# gpt-4 (please run gpt-3.5-turbo first as backup, otherwise please disable --backup_pred_path)
python main.py --model gpt-4 --backup_pred_path output/egoschema/standard_qa.json --output_base_path output/egoschema --output_filename standard_qa_gpt4.json --api_key YOUR_OPENAI_KEY

# gpt-4-1106
python main.py --model gpt-4-1106-preview --output_base_path output/egoschema --output_filename standard_qa_gpt4_1106.json --api_key YOUR_OPENAI_KEY

Captioner	LLM	Prompt	Accuracy
LaViLa	gpt-3.5-turbo	standard	51.2
LaViLa	gpt-3.5-turbo-1106	standard	55.2
LaViLa	Llama-2-70B	standard	55.4
LaViLa	gpt-4	standard	59.0
LaViLa	gpt-4-1106-preview	standard	61.2

Prompting

# standard
## gpt-3.5-turbo
python main.py --output_base_path output/egoschema --output_filename standard_qa.json --api_key YOUR_OPENAI_KEY
## gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
python main.py --model gpt-3.5-turbo-1106 --output_base_path output/egoschema --output_filename standard_qa_1106.json --api_key YOUR_OPENAI_KEY

# zero-shot CoT
python main.py --prompt_type qa_zs-cot --output_base_path output/egoschema --output_filename cot.json --api_key YOUR_OPENAI_KEY

# (C, Q) —> S
## gpt-3.5-turbo
### Step 1. generate summary for each example. 
python main.py --task sum --prompt_type sum_q --num_words_in_sum 500 --temperature 1.0 --output_base_path output/egoschema --output_filename sum_q_500.json --api_key YOUR_OPENAI_KEY
### Step 2. feed the summary (instead of raw captions) to the LLM. 
python main.py --prompt_type qa_sum --data_path output/egoschema/sum_q_500_data.json --output_base_path output/egoschema --output_filename qa_sum_q_500.json --api_key YOUR_OPENAI_KEY
## gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
### Step 1. generate summary for each example. 
python main.py --model gpt-3.5-turbo-1106 --task sum --prompt_type sum_q --num_words_in_sum 500 --temperature 1.0 --output_base_path output/egoschema --output_filename sum_q_500_1106.json --api_key YOUR_OPENAI_KEY
### Step 2. feed the summary (instead of raw captions) to the LLM. 
python main.py --model gpt-3.5-turbo-1106 --prompt_type qa_sum --data_path output/egoschema/sum_q_500_1106_data.json --output_base_path output/egoschema --output_filename qa_sum_q_500_1106.json --api_key YOUR_OPENAI_KEY

Captioner	LLM	Prompt	Accuracy
LaViLa	gpt-3.5-turbo	standard	51.2
LaViLa	gpt-3.5-turbo	zero-shot CoT	55.2
LaViLa	gpt-3.5-turbo	(C, Q) —> S	57.4
LaViLa	gpt-3.5-turbo-1106	standard	55.2
LaViLa	gpt-3.5-turbo-1106	(C, Q) —> S	58.8

Few shot

# standard
python main.py --fewshot_example_path data/egoschema/few_shot_6.json --backup_pred_path output/egoschema/standard_qa.json --prompt_type qa_standard_fewshot --output_base_path output/egoschema --output_filename fewshot.json --api_key YOUR_OPENAI_KEY

# (C, Q) --> S
### Step  1. generate summary for each example. 
python main.py --task sum --prompt_type sum_q --num_words_in_sum 500 --temperature 1.0 --output_base_path output/egoschema --output_filename sum_q_500.json --api_key YOUR_OPENAI_KEY
### (Optional) Step 2. QA without few-shot examples. Use the result as backup predictions. Otherwise, please disable backup_pred_path in the next command. 
python main.py --prompt_type qa_sum --data_path output/egoschema/sum_q_500_data.json --output_base_path output/egoschema --output_filename qa_sum_q_500.json --api_key YOUR_OPENAI_KEY
### Step 3. QA with few-shot examples. 
python main.py --prompt_type qa_standard_fewshot --fewshot_example_path data/egoschema/few_shot_6.json --backup_pred_path output/egoschema/qa_sum_q_500.json --data_path output/egoschema/sum_q_500_data.json --output_base_path output/egoschema --output_filename fewshot_sum.json --api_key YOUR_OPENAI_KEY

Captioner	LLM	Prompt	Accuracy
LaViLa	gpt-3.5-turbo	standard	57.6
LaViLa	gpt-3.5-turbo	(C, Q) —> S	60.2

Accuracy on different categories

python eval.py \
--function eval_egoschema_cats \
--data_path output/egoschema/standard_qa.json \
--cats_path data/egoschema/categories.json

Category	Percentage	Accuracy
Purpose/Goal Identification	49.2	50.4
Tools and Materials Usage	21.8	55.0
Key Action/Moment Detection	21.6	43.5
Action Sequence Analysis	18.2	50.5
Character Interaction	9.4	63.8

NeXT-QA

python main.py \
--dataset nextqa \
--data_path data/nextqa/llava1.5_fps1.json \
--fps 0.5 \
--anno_path data/nextqa/val.csv \
--duration_path data/nextqa/durations.json \
--prompt_type qa_next \
--model gpt-4-1106-preview \
--output_base_path output/nextqa \
--output_filename gpt4_llava.json \
--api_key YOUR_OPENAI_KEY

Accuracy:

Why	How	Bef&Aft	When	Cnt	Loc	Other	Acc_C	Acc_T	Acc_D	All
70.95	65.45	54.69	70.14	58.76	82.71	78.36	69.51	61.04	75.55	67.71

Intent-QA

python main.py \
--dataset intentqa \
--data_path data/nextqa/llava1.5_fps1.json \
--fps 0.5 \
--anno_path data/intentqa/test.csv \
--duration_path data/nextqa/durations.json \
--prompt_type qa_next \
--model gpt-4-1106-preview \
--output_base_path output/intentqa \
--output_filename gpt4_llava.json \
--api_key YOUR_OPENAI_KEY

Why	How	Bef&Aft	Total
68.40	67.41	51.05	63.96

NeXT-GQA

# Step 1. QA
python main.py \
--dataset nextgqa \
--data_path data/nextqa/llava1.5_fps1.json \
--fps 0.5 \
--anno_path data/nextgqa/test.csv \
--duration_path data/nextqa/durations.json \
--prompt_type qa_next \
--model gpt-4-1106-preview \
--output_base_path output/nextgqa \
--output_filename gpt4_llava.json \
--api_key YOUR_OPENAI_KEY

# Step 2. Grounding
python main.py \
--dataset nextgqa \
--data_path data/nextqa/llava1.5_fps1.json \
--fps 0.5 \
--anno_path data/nextgqa/test.csv \
--duration_path data/nextqa/durations.json \
--nextgqa_gt_ground_path data/nextgqa/gsub_test.json \
--nextgqa_pred_qa_path output/nextgqa/gpt4_llava.json \
--prompt_type gqa \
--task gqa \
--model gpt-4-1106-preview \
--output_base_path output/nextgqa \
--output_filename gpt4_llava_grounding.json \
--save_info
--api_key YOUR_OPENAI_KEY

Acc&GQA	mIoP	[email protected]	[email protected]	mIoU	[email protected]	[email protected]
24.3	37.3	45.0	36.9	20.0	29.1	15.3

Debug

--save_info: save more information, e.g. token usage, detailed prompts, etc.
--num_examples_to_run: how many examples to run. -1 (default) to run all.
--start_from_scratch: ignore existing output files. Start from scratch.

Citation

If you find this repository useful for your research, please consider citing our work:

@misc{zhang2023simple,
      title={A Simple LLM Framework for Long-Range Video Question-Answering}, 
      author={Ce Zhang and Taixi Lu and Md Mohaiminul Islam and Ziyang Wang and Shoubin Yu and Mohit Bansal and Gedas Bertasius},
      year={2023},
      eprint={2312.17235},
      archivePrefix={arXiv},
      primaryClass={cs.CV}
}

Inconsistent Results on EgoSchema

Hi, Thanks for your great work! I tried to reproduce your results on EgoSchema but found some inconsistency. Specifically, I tried to reproduce the results with standard prompt and (C, Q) —> S prompt with the following command:

standard prompt

python main.py --model gpt-3.5-turbo-1106 --output_base_path output/egoschema --output_filename standard_qa_1106.json

Results:
    "num_total": 500,
    "num_valids": 453,
    "num_corrects": 266,
    "acc": 0.532,

(C, Q) —> S prompt

python main.py --model gpt-3.5-turbo-1106 --task sum --prompt_type sum_q --num_words_in_sum 500 --temperature 1.0 --output_base_path output/egoschema --output_filename sum_q_500_1106.json

python main.py --model gpt-3.5-turbo-1106 --prompt_type qa_sum --data_path output/egoschema/sum_q_500_1106_data.json --output_base_path output/egoschema --output_filename qa_sum_q_500_1106.json

Results:
    "num_total": 500,
    "num_valids": 493,
    "num_corrects": 278,
    "acc": 0.556,

However, it seems the results are different with the reported results in the README:

LaViLa	gpt-3.5-turbo-1106	standard	55.2
LaViLa	gpt-3.5-turbo-1106	(C, Q) —> S	58.8

I have not modified any code and use the captions you released. Any possible reasons for the inconsistency? I also noticed that the results in the README are slightly different with those in the paper. Could you please tell me what is the reason behind? Thank you!

Best regards

ceezh / llovi Goto Github PK

llovi's Introduction

LLoVi

Installation

EgoSchema

Captioner

LLM

Prompting

Few shot

Accuracy on different categories

NeXT-QA

Intent-QA

NeXT-GQA

Debug

Citation

llovi's People

Contributors

Stargazers

Watchers

Forkers

llovi's Issues

Recommend Projects

Recommend Topics

Recommend Org