Reliable procedural monitoring in video requires exposure to naturally occurring human errors and the recoveries that follow. In egocentric recordings, mistakes are often partially occluded by hands and revealed through subtle object state changes, while existing procedural datasets provide limited and inconsistent mistake and correction traces. We present PIE-V (Psychologically Inspired Error injection for Videos), a framework for constructing and benchmarking mistake-aware egocentric procedural videos by augmenting clean keystep procedures with controlled, human-plausible deviations. PIE-V combines a psychology-informed error planner conditioned on procedure phase and semantic step load, a correction planner that models recovery behavior, an LLM writer that performs cascade-consistent rewrites, and an LLM judge that validates procedural coherence and repairs failures. For video segment edits, PIE-V synthesizes replacement clips with text-guided video generation and stitches them into the episode to preserve visual plausibility. Applied to 17 tasks and 50 Ego-Exo4D scenarios, PIE-V injects 102 mistakes and generates 27 recovery corrections. For benchmarking, we introduce a unified taxonomy and a human rubric with nine metrics that cover step-level and procedure-level quality, including plausibility, procedure logic with annotator confidence, state change coherence, and grounding between text and video. Using this protocol, we audit several existing resources and compare PIE-V against a freeform LLM generation baseline under the same criteria. Together, the framework and rubric support post-completion verification for egocentric procedural mistake detection and correction.
An assistant watching egocentric video should notice a mistake from past frames alone, before the next step begins, and keep working once the person recovers. A mistake changes the state of the work, so every later step has to be read against what was done rather than against the plan. The first-mistake protocol that current online methods report on cuts each recording at its first mistake, so a fixed-time rule that never looks at the video is right on every case. We evaluate on complete trials, where mistakes and recoveries arise naturally, under a validation false-alarm budget and against controls that use timing alone. PROVIA keeps two records apart: a factual state, a learned summary of the steps each actor performed, mistakes included, and the accepted progress, an exact posterior over the state of an automaton induced from correct demonstrations by Bayesian state merging and over the execution status of each actor. Procedure-state transitions occur only in the correct-status branch; the mistake and correction branches retain the source state. A sequential test turns the per-frame mistake probability into alarms. With one filter and one optimization rule, PROVIA ranks mistakes best among the evaluated controlled baselines on CaptainCook4D, IndustReal, HoloAssist and IMPACT-ego. At a validation budget of 0.1 false alarms per minute it recalls .154 against .128 on CaptainCook4D and .034 against .015 on HoloAssist, where it leads at every budget. The pipeline runs at 58-70 frames per second. The source code is available at https://github.com/Kratos-Wen/PROVIA.
Procedural mistake detection is important for quality control and user assistance across many disciplines. Recent work in this field has achieved significant gains by using the reasoning capabilities of Video-Language Models (VLMs) as components within multi-stage pipelines, which consist of separate modules for supervised temporal action segmentation, error detection, and explainability. Consequently, they remain dependent on tailored training datasets and require task-specific training, limiting their wider applicability. To remedy this, we introduce zero-shot procedural mistake detection and propose a unified Zero-shot Procedural Mistake detection (ZeProM) framework that jointly solves procedural mistake detection and temporal action segmentation with a single pre-trained VLM. By evaluating our framework on two canonical mistake detection benchmarks, EgoPER and CaptainCook4D, we find that ZeProM can perform these tasks successfully, while approaching, or even outperforming, the performance of fully supervised methods. For instance, we achieve a 4.4 point improvement in EDA and a 2.0 point improvement in F1@.5 on average over all five EgoPER tasks compared to the strongest supervised methods. Overall, our results show the potential of unified methods for procedural mistake detection, and we hope this will steer the field away from highly complex pipelines and toward more generally applicable solutions.
Visual planning asks a model to generate the remaining steps of a procedure in natural language given a partial video context and a goal. Progress on this task is bottlenecked by annotation: clean labeled datasets are small, domain-narrow, and encode a single execution trajectory per example, even though many valid orderings exist. Large-scale instructional video corpora offer orders of magnitude more procedural content, but supervised fine-tuning on pseudo-labels from their noisy ASR narrations propagates segmentation and alignment errors and stays single-trajectory. We identify a key asymmetry: extracting clean step labels from noisy video is hard, but verifying whether a generated step sequence is temporally grounded in ASR transcripts is cheap and scales to millions of videos via precomputed text embeddings. We exploit this asymmetry in RECIPE, which uses grounding quality as a reward for GRPO, turning the noisy corpus into a verifier rather than a label source. The framework applies uniformly to two planner input configurations (Socratic, with a textual history extracted by a frozen VLM, and Video, consuming video tokens directly) and to annotated and weakly supervised regimes. We evaluate on 7 procedural benchmarks using a reference-based LLM-as-judge protocol scoring plans across 6 procedural criteria. RECIPE-RL improves over the base checkpoint at all scales (0.5B, 3B, 7B) and every benchmark, with macro-accuracy gains of +7 to +8 points in-domain and up to +16 points zero-shot. It outperforms supervised fine-tuning on both annotated and pseudo-labeled plans (the latter degrades the base) and remains robust without human annotations. Used as the proposal stage of a prior propose-assess-search planner, it improves over the strongest zero-shot baseline at every horizon on Visual Planning for Assistance, and on COIN it preserves the generation diversity that SFT collapses.
Luigi Seminara, Antonino Furnari, Lorenzo Torresani