Object Concepts Emerge from Motion
Organizations: Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunications · The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong · Department of Computer Science, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong
Abstract
Object-centric visual representations are important for physical-world perception, but existing visual pretraining methods often capture semantic categories without preserving the identity and coherence of individual instances. We present a biologically inspired framework that learns object-centric representations for single images from raw videos. Our approach uses motion boundaries as a source of object-level grouping: off-the-shelf optical flow and clustering produce pseudo-instance masks, which supervise a single-image encoder with pixel-level pairwise metric learning. The framework requires neither human annotations nor camera calibration. We first obtain 195 million pseudo-labeled frames from 7,163 hours of driving and web videos, then expand the supervision to 421 million frames with Motion-Verified Self-Training, which combines model proposals with motion evidence. We train encoders up to Swin-H and distill the learned representations into a family of Swin backbones. Across monocular depth estimation, 3D object detection, 3D occupancy prediction, and end-to-end planning, the resulting models achieve competitive or superior performance relative to supervised and self-supervised pretraining baselines, with particularly strong transfer on geometry- and instance-sensitive tasks. These results show that motion-derived supervision can teach static image encoders to represent visual instances, providing a complementary direction for scalable visual pretraining.
Figures & tables
| Pretraining | Swin-T | ViT-S/Swin-S | ViT-B/Swin-B | ViT-L/Swin-L | Swin-H | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Abs Rel | RMSE | Abs Rel | RMSE | Abs Rel | RMSE | Abs Rel | RMSE | Abs Rel | RMSE | ||||||
| ImageNet-22K | 0.055 | 2.182 | 0.969 | 0.052 | 2.093 | 0.973 | 0.052 | 2.088 | 0.975 | 0.051 | 2.044 | 0.977 | – | – | – |
| SimMIM [ 9 ] | – | – | – | – | – | – | 0.050 | 2.031 | 0.975 | 0.048 | 1.941 | 0.979 | – | – | – |
| Semantic-SAM [ 86 ] | 0.055 | 2.169 | 0.971 | – | – | – | – | – | – | 0.049 | 2.007 | 0.979 | – | – | – |
| DINOv2 [ 7 ] | – | – | – | 0.052 | 2.153 | 0.974 | 0.050 | 2.081 | 0.976 | 0.048 | 1.971 | 0.980 | – | – | – |
| DINOv3 [ 56 ] | – | – | – | 0.052 | 2.161 | 0.974 | 0.047 | 1.958 | 0.981 | 0.044 | 1.787 | 0.986 | – | – | – |
| Method | Pretraining | Abs Rel | Sq Rel | iRMSE | SILog |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NeW CRFs [ 87 ] | ImageNet sup. | 8.37 | 1.83 | 11.03 | 10.39 |
| VA-DepthNet [ 88 ] | ImageNet sup. | 7.96 | 1.66 | 10.44 | 9.63 |
| IEBins [ 89 ] | MIM [ 90 ] | 7.82 | 1.60 | 10.68 | 9.84 |
| NDDepth [ 91 ] | MIM [ 90 ] | 7.75 | 1.59 | 10.62 | 9.62 |
| DCDepth [ 83 ] | Semantic-SAM [ 86 ] | 7.83 | 1.54 | 10.12 | 9.60 |
| DCDepth | Ours (Swin-L) | 6.44 | 1.07 | 8.66 | 8.07 |
| Pretraining | Swin-T | Swin-S | Swin-B | Swin-L | Swin-H | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NDS | mAP | NDS | mAP | NDS | mAP | NDS | mAP | NDS | mAP | |
| ImageNet-22K | 51.69 | 42.12 | 53.62 | 45.22 | 53.98 | 45.48 | 54.59 | 45.91 | – | – |
| SimMIM [ 9 ] | – | – | – | – | 54.03 | 45.18 | 54.98 | 46.52 | – | – |
| Ours | 51.56 | 42.49 | 54.35 | 45.16 | 55.69 | 47.67 | 55.89 | 47.59 | 56.92 | 48.87 |
| Pretraining | Swin-T | ViT-S/Swin-S | ViT-B/Swin-B | ViT-L/Swin-L | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NDS | mAP | NDS | mAP | NDS | mAP | NDS | mAP | |
| ImageNet-22K | 47.42 | 36.34 | 48.78 | 38.00 | 50.42 | 40.71 | 50.48 | 40.09 |
| DINOv2 [ 7 ] | – | – | 46.24 | 34.88 | 49.08 | 38.36 | 51.91 | 42.05 |
| DINOv3 [ 56 ] | – | – | 47.17 | 36.08 | 52.36 | 42.68 | 56.40 | 48.30 |
| Ours | 46.52 | 36.45 | 50.76 | 40.54 | 51.94 | 42.23 | 52.88 | 43.26 |
| Pretraining | Swin-T | ViT-S/Swin-S | ViT-B/Swin-B | ViT-L/Swin-L | Swin-H | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RayIoU | RayIoU | RayIoU | RayIoU | RayIoU | ||||||
| ImageNet-22K | 35.50 | 29.40 | 36.80 | 30.40 | 37.60 | 31.30 | 37.60 | 31.40 | – | – |
| SimMIM [ 9 ] | – | – | – | – | 38.00 | 31.70 | 38.60 | 32.60 | – | – |
| DINOv2 [ 7 ] | – | – | 35.90 | 29.50 | 37.10 | 31.00 | 39.00 | 32.80 | – | – |
| DINOv3 [ 56 ] | – | – | 36.73 | 30.40 | 38.79 | 32.65 | 41.02 | 34.93 | – | – |
| Ours | 36.72 | 30.50 | 38.45 | 32.40 | 39.41 | 33.13 | 40.04 | 33.99 | 40.03 | 33.97 |
| Backbone | NC | DAC | DDC | TL | EP | TTC | LK | HC | EC | EPDMS |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DA-ViT-L [ 99 ] | 98.4 | 98.6 | 99.6 | 99.8 | 90.5 | 97.8 | 97.0 | 98.3 | 78.6 | 90.5 |
| DINOv2-L [ 7 ] | 97.9 | 97.0 | 99.3 | 99.7 | 87.7 | 97.0 | 95.5 | 98.2 | 77.1 | 87.2 |
| DINOv3-L [ 56 ] | 98.1 | 97.8 | 99.5 | 99.7 | 89.5 | 97.4 | 96.2 | 98.3 | 77.3 | 89.0 |
| Ours, Swin-L | 98.6 | 97.1 | 99.5 | 99.7 | 89.4 | 98.1 | 96.2 | 98.3 | 77.6 | 88.9 |
| Pipeline | Pretraining supervision | Model | KITTI SILog | nuScenes NDS | nuScenes RayIoU |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cycle-1 | Motion-derived (195M) | Cycle-1 Swin-H | 5.90 | 56.80 | 39.71 |
| Cycle-2 | Motion-verified (421M) | Ours (Swin-H) | 5.69 | 56.92 | 40.03 |
| Variant | Pretraining schedule | Additional exposures | Abs Rel | Sq Rel | RMSE | RMSE log | SILog | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cycle-1 | 50 epochs on Cycle-1 labels | – | 0.0509 | 0.1409 | 2.0084 | 0.0769 | 0.976 | 6.9709 |
| Cycle-1, longer | 75 epochs on Cycle-1 labels | 4.88B | 0.0512 | 0.1446 | 2.0052 | 0.0773 | 0.973 | 6.9885 |
| Cycle-2 | 50 Cycle-1 + 10 Cycle-2 epochs | 4.21B | 0.0498 | 0.1385 | 1.9766 | 0.0756 | 0.978 | 6.8761 |
| Subset | Labels | Inst./frame | Ref. coverage (%) | IoU (%) | Matched frames (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Paired frames | Cycle-1 | 1.6 | 13.8 | 83.8 | 45.0 |
| Paired frames | Cycle-2 | 2.4 | 16.6 | 81.6 | 54.0 |
| Cycle-2-only frames | Cycle-2 | 2.1 | 14.6 | 81.2 | 47.5 |
| Ours | DINO | IN | SILog | Abs Rel | RMSE |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ✓ | 6.714 | 0.049 | 1.958 | ||
| ✓ | 7.119 | 0.052 | 2.153 | ||
| ✓ | 7.455 | 0.055 | 2.182 | ||
| ✓ | ✓ | 7.071 | 0.052 | 2.117 | |
| ✓ | ✓ | 6.622 | 0.048 | 1.948 |
Object-Centric Representation Learning
Object-Centric Representation Learning studies visual models that organize scenes into distinct objects and their properties, positions, and relations.
See all 89 papers