MODAL: Multi-Modal Object Re-ID via Model-Driven Sparse Decoupling and Text-Image Differential Filtering
Organizations: College of Computer Science and Technology, National University of Defense Technology, Changsha 410073, China · School of Computer Science and Information Engineering, Hefei University of Technology, Hefei 230002, China
Abstract
Multi-modal object re-identification (Re-ID) aims to facilitate cross-camera object retrieval in complex environments by leveraging complementary information from visual (e.g., RGB, NIR, TIR) and textual modalities. However, existing approaches often lack principled feature disentanglement and coherent multi-modal integration, leading to entangled representations that introduce cross-modal conflicts, obscure discriminative cues, and suffer distribution shift under modality-missing conditions. To tackle these challenges, we propose MODAL, a novel multi-modal object re-identification framework, grounded in coupled sparse coding theory and differential suppression principles. A core component of MODAL is a Multi-modal Feature Sparse Decoupling module, developed in a model-driven deep unrolling manner based on multi-modal coupled sparse coding. It explicitly decomposes multi-modal features into uni-modal specific, bi-modal and tri-modal shared representations, thereby achieving more transparent and effective feature disentanglement. Benefiting from the principled feature disentanglement, MODAL naturally mitigates performance degradation in incomplete-modality scenarios via a Modality-Aware Subspace Activation that selectively activates only the consistently shared subspaces. Moreover, we propose a Text-Image Differential Filtering module that leverages coarse-grained textual semantics to adaptively suppress task-irrelevant responses in the decoupled visual representations, thereby enhancing discriminative information. Extensive experiments on four datasets demonstrate that MODAL achieves state-of-the-art performance with superior transparency.
Figures & tables
| Methods | Venue | RGBNT201 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| mAP | Rank-1 | Rank-5 | ||
| HAMNet [ 5 ] | AAAI-20 | 27.7 | 26.3 | 41.5 |
| PFNet [ 6 ] | AAAI-21 | 38.5 | 38.9 | 52.0 |
| IEEE [ 7 ] | AAAI-22 | 46.4 | 47.1 | 58.5 |
| LRMM [ 48 ] | ESWA-25 | 52.3 | 53.4 | 64.6 |
| TIENet [ 49 ] | TNNLS-25 | 54.4 | 54.4 | 66.3 |
| Methods | Venue | RGBNT100 | MSVR310 | WMVEID863 | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| mAP | Rank-1 | Rank-5 | mAP | Rank-1 | Rank-5 | mAP | Rank-1 | Rank-5 | Rank-10 | ||
| IEEE [ 7 ] | AAAI-22 | 61.3 | 87.8 | 90.2 | 21.0 | 41.0 | 57.7 | 45.9 | 48.6 | 64.3 | 67.9 |
| PFNet [ 6 ] | AAAI-21 | 68.1 | 94.1 | 95.3 | 23.5 | 37.4 | 57.0 | 50.1 | 55.9 | 68.7 | 75.1 |
| HAMNet [ 5 ] | AAAI-20 | 74.5 | 93.3 | 94.3 | 27.1 | 42.3 | 61.6 | 45.6 | 48.5 | 63.1 | 68.8 |
| CCNet [ 46 ] | INFFUS-23 | 77.2 | 96.3 | 97.2 | 36.4 | 55.2 | 72.4 | 50.3 | 52.7 | 69.6 | 75.1 |
| TOP-ReID [ 25 ] | AAAI-24 | 81.2 | 96.4 | 96.9 | 35.9 | 44.6 | – | 67.7 | 75.3 | 80.8 | 83.5 |
| Methods | Venue | M (RGB) | M (NIR) | M (TIR) | M (RGB+NIR) | M (RGB+TIR) | M (NIR+TIR) | Average | ||||||||
| m AP | R-1 | m AP | R-1 | m AP | R-1 | m AP | R-1 | m AP | R-1 | m AP | R-1 | m AP | R-1 | |||
| HACNN [ 53 ] | CVPR-18 | 12.5 | 11.1 | 20.5 | 19.4 | 16.7 | 13.3 | 9.2 | 6.2 | 6.3 | 2.2 | 14.8 | 12.0 | 13.3 | 10.7 | |
| MLFN [ 54 ] | CVPR-18 | 20.2 | 18.9 | 21.1 | 19.7 | 17.6 | 11.1 | 13.2 | 12.1 | 8.3 | 3.5 | 13.1 | 9.1 | 15.6 | 12.4 | |
| PCB [ 55 ] | ECCV-18 | 23.6 | 24.2 | 24.4 | 25.1 | 19.9 | 14.7 | 20.6 | 23.6 | 11.0 | 6.8 | 18.6 | 14.4 | 19.7 | 18.1 | |
| OSNet [ 56 ] | ICCV-19 | 19.8 | 17.3 | 21.0 | 19.0 | 18.7 | 14.6 | 12.3 | 10.9 | 9.4 | 5.4 | 13.0 | 10.2 | 15.7 | 12.9 | |
| Methods | Venue | RT-to-NT | RT-to-N | R-to-N | R-to-NT | Average | ||||||
| m AP | R-1 | m AP | R-1 | m AP | R-1 | m AP | R-1 | m AP | R-1 | |||
| EDITOR [ 26 ] | CVPR-24 | 27.3 | 27.9 | 2.80 | 0.0 | 4.0 | 2.3 | 4.3 | 4.1 | 9.6 | 8.6 | |
| TOP-ReID [ 25 ] | AAAI-24 | 43.0 | 44.6 | 14.4 | 13.3 | 15.4 | 14.0 | 11.9 | 8.7 | 21.2 | 20.2 | |
| MODAL ∗ | Ours | 37.8 | 32.9 | 5.2 | 4.9 | 5.3 | 4.3 | 4.9 | 1.8 | 13.3 | 11.0 | |
| MODAL | Ours | 54.9 | 52.9 | 17.5 | 13.2 | 13.7 | 8.5 | 12.9 | 6.9 | 24.8 | 20.4 | |
| Methods | Metric | Params | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| mAP | Rank-1 | Rank-5 | ||
| No-decoupling | 77.2 | 79.8 | 85.8 | 0 |
| Linear Mapping | 78.1 | 81.1 | 88.6 | 6.3M |
| HDM [ 29 ] | 79.9 | 83.6 | 85.9 | 14.7M |
| (ours) | 82.2 | 84.7 | 91.1 | 12.5M |
| (ours) | 83.8 | 86.1 | 90.3 | 34.9M |
| Methods | Metric | Params | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| mAP | Rank-1 | Rank-5 | ||
| Concatenation | 75.1 | 76.8 | 84.7 | 0 |
| Cross Attention | 80.1 | 82.2 | 88.9 | 10.4M |
| InverseNet [ 30 ] | 81.6 | 82.4 | 88.2 | 13.0M |
| TIDF (ours) | 83.8 | 86.1 | 90.3 | 8.5M |
| Learnable Transform | RGBNT201 | ||
| mAP | Rank1 | Rank5 | |
| None (only bottleneck) | 80.8 | 82.1 | 89.0 |
| Single Linear Layer | 82.4 | 84.5 | 90.1 |
| Group convolution | 82.7 | 85.0 | 89.2 |
| Mlp (Expansion=2) | 81.8 | 83.5 | 90.6 |
| Linear layers w/ dropout | 83.8 | 86.1 | 90.3 |
| Data Usage | Metric | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| mAP | Rank-1 | Rank-5 | |
| Text Only | 10.2 | 13.9 | 20.1 |
| Image Only | 81.4 | 82.9 | 87.6 |
| Text & Image | 83.8 | 86.1 | 90.3 |
| Text Granularity | Metric | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| mAP | Rank-1 | Rank-5 | |
| w/o Text | 81.4 | 82.9 | 87.6 |
| w/ Learnable Prompt | 81.9 | 85.8 | 90.1 |
| w/ Fixed Caption | 82.1 | 84.7 | 91.4 |
| w/ Prompt & Caption | 83.8 | 86.1 | 90.3 |
Multimodal Disentangled Representation Learning
Multimodal disentangled representation learning separates information shared across data types from modality-specific, task-irrelevant, or complementary factors.
See all 54 papers