When told to "cut the cake," a robot must choose the knife over nearby scissors, despite both objects affording the same cutting function. In real-world scenes, multiple objects may share identical affordances, yet only one is appropriate under the given task context. We call such cases confusing pairs. However, existing 3D affordance methods largely sidestep this challenge by evaluating isolated single objects, often with explicit category names provided in the query. We formalize Intent-Driven Confusable Affordance Grounding, a new 3D affordance setting that requires predicting a per-point affordance mask on the correct object within a multi-object point cloud, conditioned on implicit natural language intent. To study this problem, we construct CompassAD, the first benchmark centered on implicit intent in confusing multi-object compositions. It comprises 30 confusing object pairs spanning 16 affordance types, 6,422 compositions, and 88K+ query-answer pairs. Furthermore, we propose CompassNet, a framework that incorporates two dedicated modules tailored to this task. Instance-bounded Cross Injection (ICI) constrains language-geometry alignment within object boundaries to prevent cross-object semantic leakage. Bi-level Contrastive Refinement (BCR) enforces discrimination at both geometric-group and point levels, sharpening distinctions between target and confusable surfaces. Extensive experiments demonstrate state-of-the-art results on both seen and unseen queries, and deployment on a robotic manipulator confirms effective transfer to real-world grasping in confusing multi-object compositions.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: The proposed task of Intent-Driven Confusable Affordance Grounding. Given a multi-object point cloud and a natural language query describing an intended action, the goal is to predict a per-point affordance mask. The same composition can yield different targets depending on the query intent. We introduce CompassAD, a benchmark for this challenging setting.
Figure 2: Overview of the CompassAD benchmark. (a) Affordance concept distribution. (b) Object category distribution. (c) Hierarchy of confusing pairs grouped by target affordance type. (d) Source breakdown of the collected 3D object instances. (e) Confusion matrix between affordance and object categories, highlighting the many-to-many nature of real-world affordances.
Figure 3: Overall architecture of CompassNet. ICI confines region–language interaction within each instance via (i) instance-bounded grouping, (ii) region-language cross-attention with a learnable background token, and (iii) gated propagation back to points. BCR adds two training-only contrastive losses: TG-Softmax ranks the in-object region best matching the intent, and TP-HardNeg suppresses high-scoring negatives on confusable surfaces.
Method
Venue
aIoU ↑
AUC ↑
SIM ↑
MAE ↓
Test-Seen
3D-SPS Luo et al. (2022b)
CVPR 2022
5.23
64.7
0.158
0.096
ReferTrans Li and Sigal (2021)
NeurIPS 2021
5.81
66.3
0.171
0.093
ReLA Liu et al. (2023)
CVPR 2023
6.47
68.9
0.193
0.091
IAGNet Yang et al. (2023)
ICCV 2023
7.64
72.4
0.214
0.086
GREAT Shao et al. (2025)
CVPR 2025
9.23
75.7
0.237
0.082
Table 1: Main results on CompassAD. All methods are trained and evaluated under the same setup. Best in bold, second-best underlined. aIoU is the primary metric.
Figure 4: Qualitative comparison on CompassAD. Each triplet shows ground truth (GT), CompassNet (Ours), and GLANCE (SOTA). Left: the same composition queried with different intents activates different objects/regions (chair seat vs.bed surface), illustrating query-dependent disambiguation. Right: diverse confusing pairs (knife vs.scissors, skateboard vs.surfboard, kettle vs.cup). Red denotes higher affordance probability.
Configuration
aIoU ↑
AUC ↑
SIM ↑
MAE ↓
CompassNet (Full)
18.20
89.2
0.368
0.061
Baseline (w/o ICI & BCR)
13.80
87.2
0.290
0.079
w/o ICI
15.24
87.8
0.311
0.073
w/o Background token
17.58
88.9
0.360
0.064
w/o Group relevance loss
17.26
88.6
0.352
0.066
w/o Gated propagation
16.93
88.5
0.343
0.068
Table 2: Ablation study on CompassNet (Seen). Starting from the full model, we remove each module and its sub-components. All variants use identical training settings.
Figure 5: Real-world robotic grasping in confusing multi-object compositions. Each row shows the captured scene, CompassNet’s affordance prediction on the reconstructed point cloud (red = high probability), and the executed grasp. Top: a cutting query selects the knife over scissors. Bottom: a hammering query selects the hammer over distractors.
Task-driven 3D affordance grounding aims to localize the functional region in a cluttered 3D scene that enables an action specified by a natural-language instruction. Existing methods either predict 3D masks directly or construct them by selecting and fusing intermediate 2D/3D regions. However, they remain vulnerable to two intertwined failure modes: the predicted or selected regions may miss the target interaction area or have unsuitable granularity, while language grounding may confuse visually similar alternatives under relational instructions. To this end, we introduce ThinkAfford, which decouples high-recall affordance proposal generation from instruction-grounded reasoning. Specifically, the Affordance Proposal Generation module first uses learnable affordance prompts and multi-level visual features to predict interaction-conditioned heatmaps, extracting a variable number of fine-grained proposals without parsed object or part names as segmentation prompts. Visual-Prompted Affordance Reasoning then reasons over labeled proposal overlays using the full instruction, returning identifiers in a structured "think-then-answer" response. Moreover, Group Relative Policy Optimization uses proposal-level rewards from lifted 3D overlap to align VPAR selection with final 3D grounding. On the SceneFun3D validation split, ThinkAfford achieves 10.69% AP50 and 25.46% AP25 under the official evaluator, outperforming comparable 3D open-vocabulary and vision-language-model-based 2D-to-3D baselines. Module-level diagnostics further show that APG attains 77.5% recall at 25% intersection-over-union, while GRPO-trained VPAR achieves 72.1% selection accuracy on APG-covered queries, compared with 63.4% under supervised fine-tuning.
Xinrui Lin, Sha Zhang, Shumin Wang +3
University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei, China · The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China
Humans commonly identify 3D object affordance through observed interactions in images or videos, and once formed, such knowledge can be generically generalized to novel objects. Inspired by this principle, we advocate for a novel framework that leverages emerging multimodal large language models (MLLMs) for interaction intention-driven 3D affordance grounding, namely HAMMER. Instead of generating explicit object attribute descriptions or relying on off-the-shelf 2D segmenters, we alternatively aggregate the interaction intention depicted in the image into a contact-aware embedding and guide the model to infer textual affordance labels, ensuring it thoroughly excavates object semantics and contextual cues. We further devise a hierarchical cross-modal integration mechanism to fully exploit the complementary information from the MLLM for 3D representation refinement and introduce a multi-granular geometry lifting module that infuses spatial characteristics into the extracted intention embedding, thus facilitating accurate 3D affordance localization. Extensive experiments on public datasets and our newly constructed corrupted benchmark demonstrate the superiority and robustness of HAMMER compared to existing approaches. All code and weights are publicly available.
Lei Yao, Yong Chen, Yuejiao Su +3
The Hong Kong Polytechnic University · Huazhong University of Science and Technology
Task-conditioned manipulation requires grounding instructions to task-relevant functional parts rather than object categories. This setting is scene-dependent and often one-to-many in cluttered scenes: the same object may afford different interactions across tasks, while a single task may correspond to either one functional region or multiple valid functional regions, depending on the scene layout. Existing affordance datasets and benchmarks remain misaligned with this setting, as they typically focus on grasping or object-level affordances, rely on synthetic scenes, or assume a single instruction-region correspondence. We present Affordance2Action (A2A), a benchmark-centered learning framework for scene-level, task-conditioned part affordance grounding. At its core is A2A-Bench, a manipulation-oriented benchmark that covers both single-region and multi-region instruction correspondences in everyday scenes, with the latter highlighting the ambiguity and diversity of affordance grounding in realistic multi-object environments. To construct it at scale, we build A2A-AffordGen, an agent-assisted annotation pipeline that combines language-model filtering, interactive part segmentation, instance-level mask-out refinement, task-reasoning instruction generation, and human verification. A2A-Bench's supervision further supports diverse downstream applications, with real-time affordance grounding and affordance-conditioned manipulation policies as two representative examples. Experiments show that A2A exposes substantial gaps in generic segmentation, VLM-based grounding, and affordance distillation baselines, while improving task-level localization and providing useful spatial priors for downstream manipulation.
Litao Liu, Yifan Han, Pengfei Yi +9
Department of Computer Science, Rutgers University-New Brunswick · The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology (GZ) · Shanghai AI Laboratory