Existing online video segmentation models typically combine a per-frame segmenter with complex specialized tracking modules. While effective, these modules introduce significant architectural complexity and computational overhead. Recent studies suggest that plain Vision Transformer (ViT) encoders, when scaled with sufficient capacity and large-scale pre-training, can conduct accurate image segmentation without requiring specialized modules. Motivated by this observation, we propose the Video Encoder-only Mask Transformer (VidEoMT), a simple encoder-only video segmentation model that eliminates the need for dedicated tracking modules. To enable temporal modeling in an encoder-only ViT, VidEoMT introduces a lightweight query propagation mechanism that carries information across frames by reusing queries from the previous frame. To balance this with adaptability to new content, it employs a query fusion strategy that combines the propagated queries with a set of temporally-agnostic learned queries. As a result, VidEoMT attains the benefits of a tracker without added complexity, achieving competitive accuracy while being 5x-10x faster, running at up to 160 FPS with a ViT-L backbone. Code: https://www.tue-mps.org/videomt/
Figures & tables
Figure 1: CAVIS vs. VidEoMT (Ours). VidEoMT is much faster than both CAVIS [ 21 ] and a combination of EoMT [ 19 ] and CAVIS, while maintaining competitive AP across different sizes of DINOv2 [ 30 ] . Evaluated on YouTube-VIS 2019 val [ 38 ] .
Figure 2: Current State-of-the-Art Video Segmentation Methods vs. VidEoMT (Ours). We compare the architectures of current state-of-the-art video segmentation methods – using CAVIS [ 21 ] as a representative example – and our encoder-only VidEoMT method. VidEoMT streamlines the video segmentation framework, relying on the power of large-scale pre-training with vision foundation models rather than handcrafted task-specific components. TF means Transformer and CA means context-aware .
Figure 3: VidEoMT architecture. For the initial video frame at t=0 , learnable queries are concatenated to the patch tokens after the first L1 ViT blocks. Both sets of tokens are then jointly processed in the last L2 blocks, outputting predictions and track queries. For successive frames, learnable queries and previous-frame track queries are fed to the query fusion module before being processed by the ViT blocks.
Table 1: From CAVIS to VidEoMT. Stepwise removal of CAVIS modules toward EoMT, and modifications extending it to our VidEoMT. Evaluated on YouTube-VIS 2019 val [ 38 ] .
Method
Backbone
Pre-training
YouTube-VIS 2019 val [ 38 ]
YouTube-VIS 2021 val [ 38 ]
AP
AP 75
AR 10
GFLOPs
FPS
AP
AP 75
AR 10
GFLOPs
FPS
MinVIS [ 17 ]
Swin-L
IN21K
61.6
68.6
66.6
401
29
55.3
62.0
60.8
255
30
DVIS [ 39 ]
Swin-L
IN21K
63.9
70.4
69.0
411
23
58.7
66.6
64.6
405
24
DVIS-DAQ [ 41 ]
Swin-L
IN21K
65.7
73.6
70.7
415
13
61.1
68.2
66.6
410
11
DVIS++ [ 40 ]
ViT-L
DINOv2
67.7
75.3
73.7
846
18
62.3
70.2
68.0
830
17
DVIS-DAQ [ 41 ]
ViT-L
DINOv2
68.3
76.1
73.5
851
10
62.4
70.8
68.0
836
10
Table 2: Online VIS on YouTube-VIS 2019 and 2021.
Method
Backbone
Pre-training
YouTube-VIS 2022 val [ 38 ]
OVIS val [ 31 ]
AP L
AP 75L
AR 10L
GFLOPs
FPS
AP
AP 75
AR 10
GFLOPs
FPS
MinVIS [ 17 ]
Swin-L
IN21K
33.1
33.7
36.6
224
31
39.4
41.3
43.3
408
30
DVIS [ 39 ]
Swin-L
IN21K
39.9
42.6
44.9
401
23
45.9
48.3
51.5
419
24
DVIS-DAQ [ 41 ]
Swin-L
IN21K
–
–
–
–
–
49.5
51.7
54.9
423
12
DVIS++ [ 40 ]
ViT-L
DINOv2
37.5
39.4
43.5
820
18
49.6
55.0
54.6
868
17
CAVIS [ 21 ]
ViT-L
DINOv2
39.5
40.5
44.9
815
15
53.2
59.1
58.2
863
15
Table 3: Online VIS on YouTube-VIS 2022 and OVIS. † Input resolution of 544 (shortest image side) for OVIS, default for others.
Method
Backbone
Pre-training
VIPSeg val [ 27 ]
VPQ
STQ
GFLOPs
FPS
DVIS [ 39 ]
Swin-L
IN21K
54.7
47.7
879
20
DVIS++ [ 40 ]
ViT-L
DINOv2
56.0
49.8
2290
13
CAVIS [ 21 ]
ViT-L
DINOv2
56.9
51.0
2612
10
DVIS-DAQ [ 41 ]
ViT-L
DINOv2
57.4
52.0
2315
4
VidEoMT
ViT-L
DINOv2
55.2
48.9
1897
75
Table 4: Online VPS on VIPSeg.
Method
Backbone
Pre-training
VSPW val [ 28 ]
mVC 16
mIoU
GFLOPs
FPS
DVIS [ 39 ]
Swin-L
IN21K
94.3
61.3
879
22
DVIS++ [ 40 ]
ViT-L
DINOv2
94.2
62.8
2290
13
VidEoMT
ViT-L
DINOv2
95.0
64.9
1909
73
Table 5: Online VSS on VSPW.
Segmenter
Tracker
AP
AP 75
AR 10
GFLOPs
FPS
EoMT
CAVIS [ 21 ]
68.1
76.3
73.6
699
42
EoMT
DVIS++ [ 40 ]
67.0
73.8
73.2
683
69
EoMT
DVIS-DAQ [ 41 ]
67.3
74.8
73.4
703
28
VidEoMT
–
68.6
75.6
73.9
566
160
Table 6: Alternative approaches: EoMT as a segmenter. Comparison of EoMT equipped with state-of-the-art trackers and our proposed VidEoMT. Evaluated on YouTube-VIS 2019 val .
Encoder
Decoder
Temporal Modeling
AP
GFLOPs
FPS
ViT-Adapter
M2F [ 8 ]
TrackFormer [ 25 ]
67.8
739
22
ViT-Adapter
M2F [ 8 ]
Query Fusion
68.0
718
32
VidEoMT
–
Query Fusion
68.6
566
160
Table 7: Alternative approaches: Query propagation in the decoder. Comparison of ViT-Adapter + Mask2Former (M2F) equipped with TrackFormer or our query fusion strategy and the proposed VidEoMT. All methods use a ViT-L backbone with DINOv2 pre-training. Evaluated on YouTube-VIS 2019 val .
Model
Pre-training
AP
GFLOPs
FPS
CAVIS
DINOv3
↓ 0.0 68.8
838
13
VidEoMT
↓ 0.0 68.9 ↑ 0.1
566
133
CAVIS
DINOv2
↓ 0.0 68.9
838
15
VidEoMT
↓ 0.0 68.6 ↓ 0.3
566
160
CAVIS
EVA-02
↓ 0.0 68.0
835
12
VidEoMT
↓ 0.0 67.8 ↓ 0.2
564
119
Table 8: Impact of pre-training. VidEoMT performs better with larger-scale pre-training. Evaluated on YouTube-VIS 2019 val .
Method
Size
AP
Params
GFLOPs
FPS
CAVIS
L
↓ 0.0 68.9
358M
838
15
VidEoMT
↓ 0.0 68.6 ↓ 0.3
318M
566
160
CAVIS
B
↓ 0.0 59.5
131M
390
18
VidEoMT
↓ 0.0 58.2 ↓ 1.3
95M
182
251
CAVIS
S
↓ 0.0 55.5
57M
251
19
VidEoMT
↓ 0.0 52.8 ↓ 2.7
25M
56
294
Table 9: Impact of model size. VidEoMT performs better as ViT [ 13 ] size increases. Evaluated on YouTube-VIS 2019 val .
Appendix figures & tables6 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Figure A : Removing specialized components. This figure visualizes the step-by-step removal of complex, specialized components from the CAVIS [ 21 ] model, as reported in the results in Tab. 6 of the main manuscript.
Method
YouTube-VIS 2019 val [ 38 ]
AP
GFLOPs
FPS
No propagation
61.3
565
162
Propagation only
63.9
565
162
Non-object reset
67.8
565
157
TrackFormer
67.7
571
117
Fusion ⇒ VidEoMT
68.6
566
160
Appendix
Table A : Query propagation methods. Comparison of alternative strategies for temporal propagation.
Method
Size
AP
Params
GFLOPs
FPS
CAVIS
68.9
358M
838
15
EoMT + CAVIS
L
68.1
328M
699
42
VidEoMT
68.6
318M
566
160
CAVIS
59.5
131M
390
18
EoMT + CAVIS
B
57.4
103M
284
67
VidEoMT
58.2
95M
182
251
Appendix
Table B : Impact of model size. VidEoMT performs better as ViT [ 13 ] size increases. Evaluated on YouTube-VIS 2019 val .
Figure B : Qualitative results for video instance segmentation. We compare CAVIS [ 21 ] to VidEoMT on the YouTube-VIS 2019 dataset [ 38 ] .
Figure C : Qualitative results for video instance segmentation. We compare CAVIS [ 21 ] to VidEoMT on the OVIS dataset [ 31 ] .
Figure D : Qualitative results for video panoptic segmentation. We compare CAVIS [ 21 ] to VidEoMT on the VIPSeg dataset [ 27 ] .
Vision Foundation Models (VFMs) pre-trained at scale enable a single frozen encoder to serve multiple downstream tasks simultaneously. Recent VFM-based encoder-only models for image and video segmentation, such as EoMT and VidEoMT, achieve competitive accuracy with remarkably low latency, yet they require finetuning the encoder, sacrificing the multi-task encoder sharing that makes VFMs practically attractive for large-scale deployment. To reconcile encoder-only simplicity and speed with frozen VFM features, we propose the Plain Mask Decoder (PMD), a fast Transformer-based segmentation decoder that operates on top of frozen VFM features. The resulting model, the Plain Mask Transformer (PMT), preserves the architectural simplicity and low latency of encoder-only designs while keeping the encoder representation unchanged and shareable. The design seamlessly applies to both image and video segmentation, inheriting the generality of the encoder-only framework. On standard image segmentation benchmarks, PMT matches the frozen-encoder state of the art while running up to ~3x faster. For video segmentation, it even performs on par with fully finetuned methods, while being up to 8x faster than state-of-the-art frozen-encoder models. Code: https://github.com/tue-mps/pmt.
Existing online video segmentation methods struggle to track objects in long, complex videos with long-term occlusions. We hypothesize that this limitation is caused by (i) the inability of their temporal propagation mechanism to adaptively select the object information that is propagated across time, and (ii) their inability to be trained on long videos due to memory requirements and vanishing gradients. To address the first limitation, we propose to use a lightweight GRU-based temporal propagation module that can learn to select which information it keeps in memory and propagates across time. Second, to allow training on long videos, we introduce Truncated Query Propagation (TQP), a training strategy in which the model processes a video in chunks of frames, where information about tracked objects is propagated between chunks but backpropagation is only conducted in individual chunks, enabling longer temporal supervision without out-of-memory issues, inference overhead, or vanishing gradients. The resulting model is called the Long-term Video Mask Transformer (LVMT). Extensive experiments on six benchmarks show that LVMT sets a new state of the art across a range of video segmentation tasks, while retaining the speed of the highly efficient model it is based on, making it 10X faster than the prior state of the art. Code: https://www.tue-mps.org/lvmt
Tokenization in video models, typically through patchification, generates an excessive and redundant number of tokens. This severely limits video efficiency and scalability. While recent trajectory-based tokenizers offer a promising solution by decoupling video duration from token count, they rely on complex external segmentation and tracking pipelines that are slow and task-agnostic. We propose TrajTok, an end-to-end video tokenizer module that is fully integrated and co-trained with video models for a downstream objective, dynamically adapting its token granularity to semantic complexity, independent of video duration. TrajTok contains a unified segmenter that performs implicit clustering over pixels in both space and time to directly produce object trajectories in a single forward pass. By prioritizing downstream adaptability over pixel-perfect segmentation fidelity, TrajTok is lightweight and efficient, yet empirically improves video understanding performance. With TrajTok, we implement a video CLIP model trained from scratch (TrajViT2). It achieves the best accuracy at scale across both classification and retrieval benchmarks, while maintaining efficiency comparable to the best token-merging methods. TrajTok also proves to be a versatile component beyond its role as a tokenizer. We show that it can be seamlessly integrated as either a probing head for pretrained visual features (TrajAdapter) or an alignment connector in vision-language models (TrajVLM) with especially strong performance in long-video reasoning.
Chenhao Zheng, Jieyu Zhang, Jianing Zhang +6
University of Washington · Allen Institute for Artificial Intelligence · Woven by Toyota, Inc +1