Predictive video representations do not by themselves specify how a multimodal system should handle missing sensors. We transfer frozen V-JEPA2 features to a set of heterogeneous sensors comprised by RGB video, depth video, and radar time series. A shared fusion model uses modality queries, fixed sensor slots, and explicit availability to classify breathing activity and pose from all seven non-empty sensor subsets. The contribution is a controlled evaluation of subset supervision, pooling capacity, and representation transfer on 39 OMuSense-23 subjects with five subject-group folds and three seeds. With matched downstream parameter counts, the final model reaches recording-level activity macro-F1 of 75.23 averaged across seven subsets. Supervising all subsets in each batch improves the matched query-pooling control by 1.923 percentage points (conditional 95% subject-bootstrap interval [0.647, 3.209]), while query pooling shows no clear advantage over matched mean pooling under balanced supervision. Radar probes support transfer beyond pooled wavelet pixels, 64-token inference approximately preserves mean activity performance, and the tested Consensus-JEPA loss adds no measured benefit against its exact control.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: (a) Shared inference architecture of the final query model and the earlier Subset-query (B3). Grey marks frozen feature extraction and blue trained pooling and fusion. The example declares depth absence, and insets show representative observations. (b) Final all-view task supervision evaluates one batch under all seven non-empty subsets, averages the pose/activity losses, and makes one update, without a latent prediction loss.
Model (ID)
Nets
Training subsets
Pooling
Auxiliary target (weight)
Act. Avg-7
Pose
Joint
Worst-7
Full-only (B0)
1
Full input only
Mean
None
57.92±2.67
78.99
48.82
22.35
Subset-mean (B2)
1
Balanced seven
Mean
None
71.88±0.74
89.80
64.15
54.04
Subset-query (B3)
1
Balanced seven
Query
None
74.05±0.36
90.09
66.64
55.22
Specialists (B1)
7
One fixed subset
Query
None
74.74±0.55
90.29
67.63
60.00
Zero-loss (A0)
1
Balanced seven
Query
Full latent branch (0)
73.24±1.56
90.07
65.92
54.26
Consensus (C1)
1
Balanced seven
Query
Full latent, predictor (0.003)
73.23±1.16
90.06
65.91
54.73
Table 1: Earlier controlled reference models and their out-of-fold (OOF) recording-level macro-F1 (%). All use frozen V-JEPA2 tokens, a fusion transformer, and supervised pose/activity heads, and universal models sample one subset per batch. Activity Avg-7 is mean ± sample SD, pose and joint are Avg-7 means, and Worst-7 averages the within-seed minimum.
Pooling / supervision
Act. Avg-7
Pose
Joint
Worst-7
Query / balanced
73.31±0.21
89.41
65.49
54.43
Mean / balanced
73.51±0.99
89.61
65.58
56.09
Mean / all-view
73.80±1.00
90.47
66.72
56.70
Query / all-view
75.23±0.60
91.25
68.85
59.59
Table 2: Completed capacity-matched comparison. All four models have 882,695 downstream parameters. Scores are recording-level macro-F1 (%), with three-seed sample SD for activity Avg-7 and means for the remaining columns.
Figure 2: (a) Activity macro-F1 per sensor subset (three-seed means) for the local query/balanced control, the final query/all-view model, and the earlier specialists, with D depth and R radar. (b) Activity Avg-7 of the four capacity-matched models with training-seed SD, not subject intervals. Lower panels give paired contrasts in pp with 95% subject-bootstrap intervals.
Radar representation
Dim.
Activity
Pose
Joint
Pooled CWT pixels
256
69.99
71.30
45.06
Spectral/statistical
135
74.17
76.00
52.91
V-JEPA2 mean + PCA
256
73.95
82.22
60.49
V-JEPA2 mean
1,024
76.31
84.58
64.17
Table 3: Fixed radar linear probes, with classifier input dimension and radar-only recording-level macro-F1 (%), not seven-subset averages. Each row pools five OOF folds without repeated seeds.
Study/stage (representation)
Full input
Seven subsets
Published, N=50 , window-level protocols
OMuSense-23 [ 10 ] (477 handcrafted)
81.0/81.0
–
Physiological SSL [ 9 ] (four 1-D)
74.0/–
–
Hybrid fusion [ 8 ] (handcrafted+deep)
87.2/–
–
Initial stage, N=39 , rolling LOSO/window
V-JEPA2 (frozen RGB, depth, radar)
77.99/76.27
–
Table 4: Published OMuSense-23 baselines and stages of this work, as activity accuracy/macro-F1 (%). Published protocols are subject fivefold, except the 30/10/10 split of physiological SSL. Stages are not matched reruns, earlier F1 aggregation differs from pooled OOF scoring, and a dash marks an untabulated result.
Self-supervised learning has emerged as a powerful paradigm for learning visual representations without manual annotations, yet most methods still operate on a single modality and therefore miss the complementary structure available from heterogeneous sensors. We present Le MuMo JEPA, a self-supervised framework that learns unified representations from RGB images and aligned companion modalities. In our driving experiments, the second modality is camera-aligned LiDAR depth; we also evaluate RGB-thermal training and transfer on the Teledyne FLIR ADAS benchmark. Our approach extends LeJEPA to the multi-modal setting by learning fusion tokens that act as a latent bottleneck between modality-specific patch stems inside a shared transformer. Our default model employs a pruned fusion strategy: after an initial cross-modal attention layer, modality-specific tokens are dropped, forcing cross-modal information into the shared fusion-token grid as an efficient latent bottleneck before Sketched Isotropic Gaussian Regularization (SIGReg) is applied to the joint multimodal CLS embedding. On Waymo, Le MuMo JEPA gives the strongest performance-efficiency trade-off on downstream patch probes among the from-scratch multimodal baselines, improving CenterNet detection and dense depth while remaining competitive on segmentation. Under from-scratch training on nuScenes, Le MuMo JEPA remains the strongest model, and it also gives the best FLIR results, especially after Waymo-initialized fine-tuning. It also retains the best overall accuracy-efficiency balance in our study at substantially lower compute, memory, and estimated training time.
Ciem Cornelissen, Sam Leroux, Pieter Simoens
IDLab, Department of Information Technology, Ghent University - imec, Belgium
Recent advances in Human Activity Recognition (HAR) from wearable sensors have shown that multi-modal deep learning models consistently outperform their uni-modal counterparts. Modalities can include IMUs, RGB cameras, audio signals, and others. One important aspect of multi-modal deep learning is the sensor fusion approach we apply. Over recent years, multiple fusion paradigms have been proposed for multi-modal HAR. However, to the best of our knowledge, no head-to-head comparison of these paradigms exists on a common multi-modal HAR benchmark dataset. To address this research gap, we systematically compare seven state-of-the-art sensor fusion methods on the recently released HARMES dataset, which comprises 61 hours of fully labeled IMU, audio, and ambient humidity data. The chosen dataset focuses on 15 household and personal hygiene activities of daily living (ADLs). By applying the seven different fusion techniques to a state-of-the-art multi-modal model architecture, we show that Gated Multi-modal Fusion achieves the highest macro F1-score (0.82), surpassing the concatenation-based late fusion HARMES paper baseline of 0.76 by +6pp under leave-one-participant-out evaluation. All code used in our experiments is made publicly available on GitHub.
Ahmed Mohamady, Robin Burchard, Kristof Van Laerhoven
Multimodal human activity recognition (HAR) and human pose estimation (HPE) must cope with modalities missing at inference. Completions generated for a fixed fusion model must preserve the fusion readout: what fusion uses from each modality. We propose COMPASS, a completion-and-fusion framework in which each modality occupies a fixed slot filled by an observed representation or a completion inferred from available inputs. Its core principle, fusion-matched supervision, supervises completions with same-sample real targets at readout granularity: token means for HAR, where fusion averages tokens, and per-joint representations for HPE, where fusion preserves joint structure. Trained with complete multimodal samples, COMPASS improves subset-averaged performance over the strongest baselines on XRF55 and MM-Fi for HAR and on MM-Fi for HPE. At fixed architecture, fusion-matched supervision outperforms full-token and centered-token matching in HAR, and joint-mean matching and no matching in HPE. The code is available at: https://github.com/haowangcoder/COMPASS.
Hao Wang, Yanyu Qian, Pengcheng Weng +4
Universität Bern, Switzerland · Xi’an Jiaotong University, China · Nanyang Technological University, Singapore