FineHOI: Part-Aware Dense Representations for Zero-Shot Human-Object Interaction Detection
Authors: Francesco Tonini, Lorenzo Vaquero, Mohammad Mahdi Derakhshani, Cees Snoek, Elisa Ricci, Cigdem Beyan
Organizations: University of Trento Trento, Italy · Fondazione Bruno Kessler Trento, Italy · University of Amsterdam Amsterdam, The Netherlands · Department of Computer Science University of Verona Verona, Italy
Human-Object Interaction (HOI) detection aims to localize humans and objects in images and classify their interactions. Zero-shot HOI focuses on recognizing interactions that are not observed during training, requiring models to generalize beyond seen verb-object compositions. Recent approaches leverage Vision-Language Models (VLMs), benefiting from rich semantic representations. However, they often rely on global or detector-centric features that compress interaction cues and hinder fine-grained spatial reasoning. To overcome this limitation, we propose FineHOI, a zero-shot HOI framework that explicitly models interactions from dense patch-level features. Our approach is motivated by the observation that human-object interactions are defined by localized spatial relationships, which are not preserved by global and detector-centric representations. To this end, we introduce an Adaptive Part-Level Attention module that decomposes humans and objects into semantically coherent parts via unsupervised clustering, and re-weights them based on their interaction relevance. These representations are then integrated through a Region-Aware Interaction Transformer that integrates part-aware and global features and produces the final HOI embedding. Extensive experiments demonstrate that FineHOI consistently outperforms existing zero-shot HOI methods, achieving particularly strong gains on unseen interactions. Code is available at https://github.com/francescotonini/fine-hoi.
Figures & tables
Figure 1. Comparison of zero-shot HOI approaches. Traditional methods, e.g. ( Kim et al., 2025 ; Lei et al., 2024a ; Lei et al., 2024b ) rely on object-level features which do not capture the fine-grained details needed for interaction classification. In contrast, FineHOI explicitly models dense patch-level interactions through human/object parts decomposition, and can dynamically select which parts are most relevant for an interaction ( e.g. hands, upper-body, object handle), enabling finer understanding of human-object interactions.
Figure 2. FineHOI consists of three stages: Object Detection and Soft-Mask Extraction , which uses an object detector OD to localize the human and object instances, while a visual encoder V extracts dense spatial feature map used for human and object soft masks construction; Adaptive Part-Level Attention , which decomposes the human and object patches into structurally coherent parts and refines them based on interaction relevance; and Region-Aware Interaction Transformer , which fuses the refined human-object representations with contextual patch features for HOI classification. Ⓟ stands for feature pooling ( Eq. 3 ), Ⓜ for mask-guided feature pooling ( Eq. 9 ), and Ⓒ for concatenation.
UV
UO
UC-RF
UC-NF
UC
Model
Δ
Full
Seen
Unseen
HM
Full
Seen
Unseen
HM
Full
Seen
Unseen
HM
Full
Seen
Unseen
HM
Full
Seen
Unseen
HM
w/ LLM supervision
ADA-CM ( Lei et al., 2023 )
CLIP ViT-B/16
✓
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
33.01
34.35
27.36
30.86
31.39
31.13
32.41
31.77
-
-
-
-
EZ-HOI ( Lei et al., 2024a )
CLIP ViT-L/14
✓
32.32
33.49
25.10
29.30
32.27
32.06
33.28
32.67
33.13
34.15
29.02
31.59
31.17
30.55
33.66
32.11
-
-
-
-
DYSCO ( Tonini et al., 2025 )
CLIP ViT-L/14
✓
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
25.24
23.96
30.36
27.16
25.18
24.58
27.56
26.07
-
-
-
-
VDRP ( Yang et al., 2025 )
CLIP ViT-L/14
✓
37.18
38.16
31.16
34.31
37.81
37.50
39.39
38.41
38.13
38.48
36.72
37.58
36.46
36.21
37.48
36.83
-
-
-
-
Table 1. State-of-the-art comparison of zero-shot HOI detection methods on the HICO-DET ( Chao et al., 2018 ) dataset. Results for prior methods are taken from ( Kim et al., 2025 ; Yang et al., 2025 ) , while results marked with † are reproduced using the official code. Δ indicates the use of detector-centric features. Best results are highlighted in bold, and second-best results are underlined .
Model
Δ
HICO-DET
V-COCO
Full
Rare
Non-rare
HM
APS2
w/ LLM supervision
ADA-CM ( Lei et al., 2024b )
CLIP ViT-L/14
✓
38.40
37.52
38.66
38.09
63.9
EZ-HOI ( Lei et al., 2024a )
CLIP ViT-L/14
✓
38.61
37.70
38.89
38.30
66.1
DYSCO ( Tonini et al., 2025 )
CLIP ViT-L/14
✓
28.24
34.22
26.46
30.34
47.8
VDRP ( Yang et al., 2025 ) †
CLIP ViT-L/14
✓
38.90
39.51
38.71
39.12
66.2
Table 2. Evaluation of zero-shot methods on closed-set HOI detection on HICO-DET ( Chao et al., 2018 ) and V-COCO ( Gupta and Malik, 2015 ) datasets. Results for prior methods are taken from ( Kim et al., 2025 ; Yang et al., 2025 ) , while results marked with † are reproduced using the official code. Δ indicates the use of detector-centric features. Best results are in bold, second-best are underlined .
SM
APA
I
Full
Seen
Unseen
HM
✗
✗
✗
33.39
34.53
26.42
30.48
✓
✗
✗
35.36
36.05
31.13
33.59
✓
✓
✗
35.36
35.55
34.21
34.88
✓
✓
✓
38.10
38.51
35.58
37.04
Table 3. Ablation of FineHOI on HICO-DET dataset under the UV setting. SM stands for soft-masks ( Section 3.1 ), APA for Adaptive Part-Level Attention ( Section 3.2 ), and I for the Region-Aware Interaction Transformer ( Section 3.3 ). Best results in bold.
Full
Seen
Unseen
HM
RoIAlign
35.61
36.34
31.13
33.73
Uniform
35.41
35.68
33.80
34.74
Soft-mask
38.10
38.51
35.58
37.04
Table 4. Effectiveness of soft-mask on the HICO-DET dataset under the UV setting. Best results in bold.
Full
Seen
Unseen
HM
HO token ( h~ho )
35.49
36.21
31.07
33.64
+ global ( eˉg )
36.18
37.05
30.79
33.92
+ global ( eˉg ) + mask-guided ( eˉm )
38.10
38.51
35.58
37.04
Table 5. Effectiveness of multimodal embeddings on HICO-DET under the UV setting. Best results in bold.
Figure 3. Visualization of the part-level attention module with separate or unified human and object parts decoder.
Full
Seen
Unseen
HM
Unified human/object
36.36
37.01
32.34
34.66
Separate human/object
38.10
38.51
35.58
37.04
Table 6. Comparison between unified and separate part-level attention on the HICO-DET dataset under the UV setting.
Figure 4. Attention maps of the interaction transformer I in FineHOI. Warmer colors indicate higher attention to visual patches. Blue and green boxes denote the human and object detections, respectively.
Δ
Full
Seen
Unseen
HM
LAIN ( Kim et al., 2025 )
✓
36.01
34.72
38.11
36.41
34.85
34.38
37.18
35.78
FineHOI (Ours)
✓
36.84
35.93
41.42
38.67
36.62
35.92
40.13
38.03
Table 7. Performance of FineHOI and LAIN with DINOtxt and detector features ( Δ ) on HICO-DET under the UO setting.
Full
Seen
Unseen
HM
UV
SAM2
37.57
38.20
33.68
35.94
Soft-mask
38.10
38.51
35.58
37.04
UO
SAM2
36.61
36.38
37.70
37.04
Soft-mask
36.62
35.92
40.13
38.03
UC-RF
SAM2
37.90
37.95
37.69
37.82
Soft-mask
38.39
38.54
37.79
38.17
Table 8. Comparison between our proposed soft-mask and SAM2 on the HICO-DET dataset under all zero-shot settings.
Appendix figures & tables5 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Figure 5. Comparison between the original LAIN ( Kim et al., 2025 ) and our adapted version. In LAIN, DETR ( OD ) provides both the detections ( bh and bo ) and the human/object features ( fh and fo ) used to construct the interaction representation, which is then processed jointly with the image by a CLIP-based visual encoder ( VCLIP ). In our adaptation, we replace CLIP with DINOtxt ( V ) and use DETR only for bounding box prediction. Human and object features are obtained by average pooling (Ⓟ) the DINOtxt patch features within the corresponding detected boxes.
UO
UC-RF
UC-NF
UC
SM
APA
I
Full
Seen
Unseen
HM
Full
Seen
Unseen
HM
Full
Seen
Unseen
HM
Full
Seen
Unseen
HM
✗
✗
✗
33.00
33.40
30.98
32.19
34.02
35.72
27.27
31.50
30.56
30.54
30.65
30.60
33.70
33.51
31.17
32.34
✓
✗
✗
34.11
33.56
36.88
35.22
35.13
35.36
34.20
34.88
34.70
34.90
33.87
34.38
35.42
36.16
32.68
34.42
✓
✓
✗
35.97
35.47
38.48
36.98
37.06
37.55
35.09
36.32
35.40
35.71
34.15
34.93
36.06
36.79
33.16
34.98
✓
✓
✓
36.62
35.92
40.13
38.03
38.39
38.55
37.79
38.17
36.58
36.30
38.11
37.15
36.88
38.00
34.79
36.10
Appendix
Table 9. Ablation of FineHOI on HICO-DET dataset across UO, UC-RF, UC-NF, and UC settings. UV setting is shown in Table 3 SM stands for soft-masks ( Section 3.1 ), APA for Adaptive Part-Level Attention ( Section 3.2 ), and I for the Region-Aware Interaction Transformer ( Section 3.3 ). Best results in bold.
Figure 6. Qualitative results of the unsupervised part decomposition ( Section 3.2 ) with K={1,5,10,20} .
K
Full
Seen
Unseen
HM
1
36.76
37.40
32.90
35.15
5
37.37
37.90
34.18
36.04
10
38.10
38.51
35.58
37.04
20
37.02
37.50
34.13
35.81
Appendix
Table 10. Effectiveness of K on HICO-DET under the UV setting. Best results in bold.
Figure 7. Attention maps of the interaction transformer I in FineHOI. Warmer colors indicate higher attention to visual patches.
School of Computer Science and Engineering, Nanjing University of Science and Technology · School of Computing and Artificial Intelligence, Southwestern University of Finance and Economics · Nanjing Forestry University