Knowledge is Power: Advancing Few-shot Action Recognition with Multimodal Semantics from MLLMs
Authors: Jiazheng Xing, Chao Xu, Hangjie Yuan, Mengmeng Wang, Jun Dan, Hangwei Qian, Yong Liu
Organizations: College of Control Science and Engineering, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, 310027, Zhejiang, China. · College of Computer Science and Technology, Zhejiang University of Technology, Hangzhou, 310023, Zhejiang, China. · College of Information Science and Electronic Engineering, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, 310027, Zhejiang, China. · CFAR and IHPC, A*STAR, 138632, Singapore.
Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) have propelled the field of few-shot action recognition (FSAR). However, preliminary explorations in this area primarily focus on generating captions to form a suboptimal feature->caption->feature pipeline and adopt metric learning solely within the visual space. In this paper, we propose FSAR-LLaVA, the first end-to-end method to leverage MLLMs (such as Video-LLaVA) as a multimodal knowledge base for directly enhancing FSAR. First, at the feature level, we leverage the MLLM's multimodal decoder to extract spatiotemporally and semantically enriched representations, which are then decoupled and enhanced by our Multimodal Feature-Enhanced Module into distinct visual and textual features that fully exploit their semantic knowledge for FSAR. Next, we leverage the versatility of MLLMs to craft input prompts that flexibly adapt to diverse scenarios, and use their aligned outputs to drive our designed Composite Task-Oriented Prototype Construction, effectively bridging the distribution gap between meta-train and meta-test sets. Finally, to enable multimodal features to guide metric learning jointly, we introduce a training-free Multimodal Prototype Matching Metric that adaptively selects the most decisive cues and efficiently leverages the decoupled feature representations produced by MLLMs. Extensive experiments demonstrate superior performance across various tasks with minimal trainable parameters.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: (a), (b), and (c) indicate the pipeline of the data-driven unimodal/multimodal method, knowledge-driven CapFSAR, and our FSAR-LLaVA, respectively. Our FSAR-LLaVA Unknown , which uses the fixed input prompt: “What’s the action of the video?” without introducing additional textual label information, fully leverages the multimodal features of MLLM and achieves state‑of‑the‑art performance that requires minimal parameters, as depicted in part (d), which refers to the performance comparison in the HMDB51 5-way 1-shot task.
Figure 2: Overview of our FSAR-LLaVA: Visual inputs and text prompts are processed through our knowledge base to extract multimodal tokens Tm from the multimodal decoder’s hidden layer. These tokens are downsampled and decoupled into visual tokens Tv and textual tokens Tt . The tokens are then passed through the Multimodal Feature-enhanced Module, and features from both branches are processed in the Composite Task-oriented Prototype Construction Module to obtain the enhanced support set class prototypes PvS and PtS . Finally, the class prototypes and query features are fed into the Multimodal Matching Metric to yield the probability distribution pQ2S and loss LQ2S .
Figure 3: Overview of our CTPCM, which is divided into local prototype construction and global prototype construction.
HMDB51
UCF101
Kinetics
SSv2-Small
SSv2-Full
Method
Pre-training
1-shot
5-shot
1-shot
5-shot
1-shot
5-shot
1-shot
5-shot
1-shot
5-shot
Data-driven Unimodal
OTAM Cao et al. (2020)
INet-RN50
54.5
68.0
79.9
88.9
73.0
85.8
36.4
48.0
42.8
52.3
TRX Perrett et al. (2021)
INet-RN50
54.9
75.6
81.0
96.1
65.1
85.9
36.0
56.7
42.0
64.6
STRM Thatipelli et al. (2022)
INet-RN50
57.6
77.3
82.7
96.9
65.1
86.7
37.1
55.3
43.1
68.1
HyRSM Wang et al. (2022b)
INet-RN50
60.3
76.0
83.9
94.7
73.7
86.1
40.6
56.1
54.3
69.0
HCL Zheng et al. (2022)
INet-RN50
59.1
76.3
82.5
93.9
73.7
85.8
38.7
55.4
47.3
64.9
Table 1: Comparison under 5-way k-shot settings on five widely-used benchmarks including HMDB51, UCF101, Kinetics, SSv2-Small, and SSv2-Full.
Figure 4: Visualization of the attention map for the data-driven method Hyrsm Wang et al. (2022b) and our FSAR-LLaVA on HMDB51. We also provide the Video-LLaVA’s QA results for these videos using “Unknown” prompts.
Figure 5: Direct qualitative analysis of the Video-LLaVA’s output with different types of prompts. For clarity, we highlight words in blue to represent accurate action labels, in red to reveal the question posed in Video-LLaVA, and in green to indicate inaccurate action descriptions.
Pipeline
Kinetics
HMDB
SSv2-Small
Using “Unknown” Prompts
feature → caption → feature →
85.7
69.8
49.5
feature →
88.1
79.5
49.9
Using “Known” Prompts
feature → caption → feature →
87.8
75.4
56.6
feature →
91.1
83.8
60.7
Table 2: Performance comparison with different pipelines.
Kinetics
HMDB51
UCF101
SSv2-Small
Method
1s
5s
1s
5s
1s
5s
1s
5s
Avg.
79.3
92.6
61.0
81.2
91.9
97.9
32.7
47.6
Dec-Avg.
82.1
93.5
63.3
82.7
93.2
98.3
33.5
48.8
Table 3: The Necessity of Multimodal Feature Decoupling. “Avg.” and “Dec-Avg.” indicate the global average pooling and global average pooling with decoupling the features.
Table 4: Effect of different branches. “Ukn.” and “Kn.” refer to Unknown and Known.
Table 5: Impact of the components in MFM. “ST-SA”, “V-CA”, and “T-CA” indicate spatiotemporal self-attention, visual-lead cross-attention, and text-lead cross-attention, respectively. “Ukn.” and “Kn.” refer to Unknown and Known.
Table 6: Impact of the components in CTPCM. “LPC” and “GPC” represent local and global prototype construction. “Ukn.” and “Kn.” refer to Unknown and Known.
Kinetics
SSv2-Small
Method
Unknown
Known
Unknown
Known
Hausdorff
92.0
92.3
44.0
45.5
Bi-MHM
93.7
94.0
48.9
60.6
Our MPMM
94.8
95.3
51.0
65.5
Table 7: Comparison of different matching metrics.
Figure 6: Performance comparison between our knowledge-driven FSAR-LLaVA and the data-driven baseline of the 5-way 1-shot task on five widely used datasets. All methods share the same vision encoder.
Pre-Training
Params
FLOPs
Time
Acc
Trainable/Full
Backbone/Module/Total
OTAM Cao et al. (2020)
INet-RN50
23.5 M / 23.5 M
32.8 G / 8.3 G / 41.1 G
0.48 s/item
54.5
HyRSM Wang et al. (2022b)
INet-RN50
65.6 M / 65.6 M
32.8 G / 8.5 G / 41.3 G
0.51 s/item
60.3
CLIP-FSAR Wang et al. (2023b)
CLIP-ViT-B
90.2 M / 90.2 M
140.8 G / 24.0 G / 164.8 G
1.28 s/item
77.1
FSAR-LLaVA (Offline)
Video-LLaVA-7B
9.3 M / 9.3 M
- / 30.4 G / 30.4 G
0.18 s/item
84.3
FSAR-LLaVA (Online)
Video-LLaVA-7B
9.3 M / 7 B
30.19 T / 0.03 T / 30.22 T
4.39 s/item
84.3
Table 8: Complexity analysis for 5-way 1-shot HMDB51 evaluation. Our FSAR-LLaVA utilizes the “Unknown” prompts here. “Time” represents the training time cost of each 5-way 1-shot task. “Acc” means the 5-way 1-shot accuracy on HMDB51. All experiments are carried out on one Nvidia H20 GPU.
Trainable Params
Kinetics
SSv2-Small
D′=128
6.38M
94.0
50.1
D′=256
9.26M
94.8
51.0
D′=512
16.52M
95.1
51.4
D′=1024
37.02M
95.2
53.1
Table 9: Effectiveness comparison with different mapping dimension D′ .
Kinetics
SSv2-Small
Unknown
Known
Unknown
Known
α=0
93.0
94.0
50.3
63.9
α=0.1
93.3
94.2
51.0
65.5
α=0.3
93.9
94.4
49.9
63.7
α=0.5
94.2
94.7
49.7
62.9
α=0.7
94.5
94.9
49.4
62.3
Table 10: Analysis of learnable parameter α in CTPCM.
Kinetics
HMDB51
SSv2-Small
1-shot
5-shot
1-shot
5-shot
1-shot
5-shot
u=10
94.8
97.1
84.3
92.4
51.0
71.1
u=20
94.7
97.2
84.2
92.4
50.6
70.2
u=30
94.7
97.2
84.2
92.5
50.1
69.3
u=40
94.5
97.3
84.1
92.6
49.9
68.6
u=50
94.4
97.4
84.0
92.7
49.7
68.3
Table 11: Analysis of adjustable parameter u in MPMM.
Kinetics
HMDB
UCF
SSv2-Small
SSv2-Full
Avg.
l=0
76.8
58.7
91.1
29.5
30.3
57.3
l=1
76.7
58.4
91.1
29.2
30.1
57.1
l=2
76.6
58.4
91.0
28.9
30.0
57.0
l=3
76.4
58.7
91.4
29.2
29.8
57.1
l=4
76.5
59.0
91.2
29.1
29.6
57.1
l=5
77.6
59.4
91.8
29.5
29.2
57.5
Table 12: Performance comparison of the hidden layer features from Video-LLaVA. The boldfacen and underline font indicate the highest and the second highest results. Note that “Avg.” denotes Average.
Prompt
Pre-training
SSv2-Small
SSv2-Full
1-shot
5-shot
1-shot
5-shot
“What’s the action of the video?”
Video-LLaVA-7B
51.0
71.1
56.7
76.7
“Describe the sequence of actions happening in the video.”
Video-LLaVA-7B
51.3
71.0
56.5
76.4
“How does the interaction between the person and the object evolve?”
Video-LLaVA-7B
52.0
71.6
57.1
77.2
“What’s the action of the video?”
Qwen3-VL-2B
54.2
71.7
56.6
77.1
“Describe the sequence of actions happening in the video.”
Qwen3-VL-2B
54.1
71.5
56.7
77.0
Table 13: Effect of different “Unknown” prompts on temporal-related datasets using different MLLMs within our framework.
Few-shot action recognition (FSAR) requires models to generalize to novel action categories from only a handful of annotated samples. Despite progress with vision-language models, existing approaches still suffer from semantic-temporal misalignment, where static textual prompts fail to capture decisive visual cues that appear sparsely across sequences, and from inadequate modeling of multi-scale temporal dynamics, as short-term discriminative cues and long-range dependencies are often either oversmoothed or fragmented. To address these challenges, we propose Semantic Temporal Adaptive Representation Learning (STAR), a unified framework, consisting of a semantic-alignment component and a temporal-aware component, effectively bridging the semantic and temporal gaps and transferring the sequence modeling capability of Mamba into the FSAR. The semantic alignment module introduces a Temporal Semantic Attention (TSA) mechanism, which performs frame-level cross-modal alignment with textual cues, ensuring fine-grained semantic-temporal consistency. The temporal-aware module incorporates a Semantic Temporal Prototype Refiner (STPR) that integrates semantic-guided Mamba blocks with multi-frequency temporal sampling and bidirectional state-space refinement, yielding semantically aligned prototypes with enhanced discriminative fidelity and temporal consistency. Furthermore, temporally dependent class descriptors derived from large language models (LLMs) provide long-range semantic guidance. Extensive experiments on five FSAR benchmarks demonstrate the consistent superiority of STAR over state-of-the-art methods. For instance, STAR achieves up to 8.1% and 6.7% gains on the SSv2-Full and SSv2-Small datasets under the 1-shot setting, and 7.3% on HMDB51, validating its effectiveness under limited supervision. The code is available at https://github.com/HongliLiu1/STAR-main.
Hongli Liu, Yu Wang, Shengjie Zhao
School of Computer Science and Technology, Tongji University, Shanghai, China · Engineering Research Center of Key Software Technologies for Smart City Perception and Planning, Ministry of Education
Few-shot action recognition (FSAR) aims to recognize unseen action categories with only a small number of annotated video samples. Recent works typically apply single-prototype supervision at the network output and fail to sufficiently exploit rich cross-frame global spatial information in videos. Even existing multi-level metric schemes only impose parallel prototype constraints on intermediate layers, without progressive supervision along the full feature pipeline, which results in limited generalization ability of the learned class prototypes. Inspired by this, we present a novel method, hierarchical metric learning for few-shot action recognition (HML-FSAR). First, a spatial-enhanced module is developed to capture cross-frame global spatial representations. Combined with temporal MHA, heterogeneous alignment, spatial-temporal feature fusion and dictionary learning modules, it constructs the complete feature processing pipeline. Second, a hierarchical metric learning (HML) strategy is embedded into HML-FSAR. Composed of center metric, alignment metric, contrastive metric, dictionary metric and prototype metric, HML imposes progressive multi-stage complementary constraints from frame-level representations to final class prototypes, so as to jointly optimize feature compactness, heterogeneous spatial-temporal alignment, inter-class discriminability and anti-noise robustness. The proposed HML-FSAR method is validated on five widely-used FSAR datasets, and experimental results fully demonstrate its effectiveness.
Jiaxin Zhang, Haoran Gao, Xizhan Gao +3
School of Information Science and Engineering, University of Jinan, Shandong, China
Few-Shot Action Recognition (FSAR) is a challenging task that requires recognizing novel action categories with a few labeled videos. Recent works typically apply semantically coarse category names as auxiliary contexts to guide the learning of discriminative visual features. However, such context provided by the action names is too limited to provide sufficient background knowledge for capturing novel spatial and temporal concepts in actions. In this paper, we propose DiST, an innovative Decomposition-incorporation framework for FSAR that makes use of decoupled Spatial and Temporal knowledge provided by large language models to learn expressive multi-granularity prototypes. In the decomposition stage, we decouple vanilla action names into diverse spatio-temporal attribute descriptions (action-related knowledge). Such commonsense knowledge complements semantic contexts from spatial and temporal perspectives. In the incorporation stage, we propose Spatial/Temporal Knowledge Compensators (SKC/TKC) to discover discriminative object-level and frame-level prototypes, respectively. In SKC, object-level prototypes adaptively aggregate important patch tokens under the guidance of spatial knowledge. Moreover, in TKC, frame-level prototypes utilize temporal attributes to assist in inter-frame temporal relation modeling. These learned prototypes thus provide transparency in capturing fine-grained spatial details and diverse temporal patterns. Experimental results show DiST achieves state-of-the-art results on five standard FSAR datasets.
Hongyu Qu, Xiangbo Shu, Rui Yan +3
School of Computer Science and Engineering, Nanjing University of Science and Technology, Nanjing 210094, China. · State Key Lab of Brain-Machine Intelligence, Zhejiang University, China.