CrowdCue: Specialist-Cue Conditioning for Vision-Language Crowd Counting
Organizations: University of Doha for Science and Technology, Doha, Qatar
Abstract
Generative vision-language models (VLMs) offer a counting paradigm in which one model produces both a count and a natural-language account of the scene, yet their raw counting accuracy sits in the range of sub-million-parameter specialist regressors. The open question is whether auxiliary guidance from a pretrained specialist can lift them into useful territory, and through which channel that guidance is best routed. We evaluate Qwen2.5-VL-7B on four widely used crowd counting benchmarks (ShanghaiTech A and B, UCF-QNRF, NWPU-Crowd). Zero-shot prompting rarely produces a parseable count, so LoRA supervised fine-tuning establishes the baseline at overall MAE 81.64. Conditioning on a P2PNet-derived density heatmap as an auxiliary visual signal fails in every encoding we tested, and an adversarial-swap protocol shows the model reads the heatmap but applies it counterproductively. We propose CrowdCue, a family that supplies the same specialist's already-integrated integer count to the VLM as a discrete symbol. The text-channel variant reaches MAE 72.04. The visual-channel variant, which renders the integer as printed digits and supplies it as a second image, reaches MAE 62.65, the strongest result in this paper and well ahead of the cue-supplying specialist alone (84.45 on the same split). In the late-fusion VLM we study, the binding constraint is not the channel but the abstraction level at which the specialist signal is delivered.
Figures & tables
| Method | Year | Paradigm | Key contribution |
| ZIP ( Ma et al., 2025b ) | 2025 | Density | Zero-Inflated Poisson loss; SHA-A 47.8 (105M), 71.1 (0.81M) |
| DSGC-Net ( Wu et al., 2025 ) | 2025 | Density | Dual-stream graph CNN; SHA-A 48.9, SHB 5.9 |
| RCCFormer ( Chen et al., 2025 ) | 2025 | Density | Multi-feature Transformer; SHA 48.3, QNRF 77.6, NWPU 74.3 |
| TCFormer ( Liu et al., 2025 ) | 2025 | Density | 5M-parameter weakly-supervised Transformer |
| CrowdDiff ( Ranasinghe et al., 2024 ) | 2024 | Diffusion | Multi-hypothesis density; SHA-A 47.4 |
| STEERER ( Han et al., 2023 ) | 2023 | Density | Selective inheritance for scale variation |
| Dataset | Train | Test | Count Range | Scene Type |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ShanghaiTech A | 300 | 182 | 33–3,138 | Dense gatherings |
| ShanghaiTech B | 400 | 316 | 9–576 | Street scenes |
| UCF-QNRF | 1,201 | 334 | 49–12,865 | Web-crawled crowds |
| NWPU-Crowd | 3,109 | 500 | 0–20,033 | Diverse scenes |
| Total | 5,010 | 1,332 |
| Configuration | Valid Format | Rate |
|---|---|---|
| Zero-shot, single image | 179 / 1,332 | 13.4% |
| Zero-shot, dual image | 11 / 1,332 | 0.8% |
| SFT, single image | 1,332 / 1,332 | 100% |
| SFT, dual image | 1,332 / 1,332 | 100% |
| SHA-A | SHA-B | QNRF | NWPU | Overall | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Config | MAE | RMSE | MAE | MAE | MAE | MAE |
| SFT single | 70.17 | 116.01 | 15.47 | 119.19 | 102.55 | 81.64 |
| SFT dual | 71.16 | 114.45 | 13.93 | 153.61 | 119.13 | 96.26 |
| Configuration | SHA-A | SHB | QNRF | NWPU | Overall | RMSE |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SFT-single (no heatmap, baseline) | 70.17 | 15.47 | 119.19 | 102.55 | 81.64 | 352.66 |
| SFT-dual (valid P2PNet heatmap) | 71.16 | 13.93 | 153.61 | 119.13 | 96.26 | 443.13 |
| SFT-side-by-side (valid heatmap) | 75.80 | 16.84 | 156.40 | 136.63 | 104.86 | 497.93 |
| SFT-overlay (valid heatmap) | 73.37 | 17.66 | 170.30 | 560.86 | 267.45 | 4586.92 |
| Heatmap condition | MAE | from correct |
|---|---|---|
| Correct (P2PNet heatmap) | 96.26 | — |
| Inverted (hot cold, same spatial pattern) | 97.85 | 1.6 |
| Gray (uniform, no spatial pattern) | 101.80 | 5.5 |
| Random noise | 103.12 | 6.9 |
| Shuffled (different valid heatmap) | 119.65 | 23.4 |
| Configuration | Channel | Form | SHA-A | SHB | QNRF | NWPU | Overall | RMSE |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SFT-single (baseline) | — | none | 70.17 | 15.47 | 119.19 | 102.55 | 81.64 | 352.66 |
| P2PNet specialist alone | — | integer source | 61.26 | 21.93 | 121.88 | 107.41 | 84.45 | 221.93 |
| SFT-dual (valid heatmap) | visual | dense field | 71.16 | 13.93 | 153.61 | 119.13 | 96.26 | 443.13 |
| CrowdCue-T (Sec. 4.7 ) | text | integer | 66.08 | 11.74 | 113.44 | 84.65 | 72.04 | 249.83 |
| Per-region (text, ) | text | 4 sub-counts + total | 71.74 | 12.80 | 115.20 | 78.36 | 71.19 | 191.47 |
| Grid (text, ) | text | 16 sub-counts + total | 68.68 | 13.15 | 120.06 | 79.19 | 72.33 | 213.12 |
| Inject override | MAE | from correct |
|---|---|---|
| Correct | 72.04 | — |
| 96.90 | 24.9 | |
| Random | 133.08 | 61.0 |
| Half | 138.86 | 66.8 |
| 376.22 | 304.2 |
| Override | Sparse | Medium | Dense | Very dense | Extreme | Overall |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Correct | 16.78 | 13.71 | 50.67 | 122.77 | 379.70 | 72.04 |
| Zero | 16.85 | 19.30 | 56.62 | 205.50 | 498.37 | 96.90 |
| Half | 11.68 | 20.48 | 75.56 | 250.84 | 832.50 | 138.86 |
| Random | 10.19 | 20.73 | 90.55 | 206.67 | 783.17 | 133.08 |
| 16.77 | 16.47 | 68.94 | 249.12 | 3393.13 | 376.22 |
| Config | SHA-A | SHB | QNRF | NWPU (held out) | Overall |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SFT single (excl-NWPU) | 80.03 | 22.70 | 172.96 | 133.99 | 109.99 |
| CrowdCue-T (excl-NWPU) | 70.84 | 13.78 | 116.34 | 106.18 | 81.97 |
| Assistant target | SHA-A | SHB | QNRF | NWPU | Overall |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Verify-and-adjust template | 74.15 | 13.46 | 110.08 | 91.23 | 75.17 |
| Flat scene descriptor (CrowdCue-T) | 66.08 | 11.74 | 113.44 | 84.65 | 72.04 |
| Predictor | MAE | RMSE |
|---|---|---|
| P2PNet alone | 84.45 | 221.93 |
| SFT-single alone | 81.64 | 352.66 |
| Mean of the two | 74.13 | 256.37 |
| Fitted linear blend (5-fold CV) | 87.80 | 259.59 |
| Per-bucket gate (P2PNet-predicted bucket) | 75.42 | 217.03 |
| Per-bucket gate (ground-truth bucket, oracle) | 70.00 | 195.19 |
| Density Bucket | Count Range | (test) | MAE |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sparse | 0–50 | 171 | 8.99 |
| Medium | 50–200 | 498 | 16.20 |
| Dense | 200–500 | 378 | 52.89 |
| Very dense | 500–1,000 | 160 | 144.20 |
| Extreme | 1,000 | 125 | 448.56 |
| Method | Params | SHA-A | SHA-B | QNRF | NWPU | Free-form output |
| ZIP-B ( Ma et al., 2025b ) | 105.6M | 47.8 | 5.5 | 69.4 | 60.1 | no |
| DSGC-Net ( Wu et al., 2025 ) | 30M | 48.9 | 5.9 | — | — | no |
| RCCFormer ( Chen et al., 2025 ) | — | 48.3 | 6.6 | 77.6 | 74.3 | no |
| CrowdDiff ( Ranasinghe et al., 2024 ) | — | 47.4 | — | — | — | no |
| CLIP-EBC ( Ma et al., 2025a ) | — | 55.0 | 6.3 | — | — | partial |
| ZIP-P ( Ma et al., 2025b ) | 0.81M | 71.1 | — | — | — | no |
Crowd Counting
Crowd counting estimates how many people appear in images or video, supporting occupancy monitoring, safety planning, and crowd management.
See all 23 papers