Evaluates a model's ability to ground referential language in 3D scenes when references are imperfect or ambiguous. It probes whether the model can correctly identify existing objects, detect non-existent references, and generate plausible alternative objects based on spatial and semantic reasoning. Use when the user wants to benchmark on IRef-VLA, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports score_sim.
Scanned 9/11/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add qhjqhj00/research-skills-pool --skill irefvla-eval --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Irefvla Eval?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/qhjqhj00-irefvla-eval)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: irefvla-eval
description: Evaluates a model's ability to ground referential language in 3D scenes when references are imperfect or ambiguous. It probes whether the model can correctly identify existing objects, detect non-existent references, and generate plausible alternative objects based on spatial and semantic reasoning. Use when the user wants to benchmark on IRef-VLA, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports score_sim.
metadata:
skill_kind: dataset_eval
source_arxiv: 2503.17406
bibtex_key: zhang2025irefvla
confidence: high
---
# irefvla-eval
> IRef-VLA: A Benchmark for Interactive Referential Grounding with Imperfect Language in 3D Scenes — Zhang et al. (2025) (arXiv:2503.17406, 2025)
## What this evaluates
Evaluates a model's ability to ground referential language in 3D scenes when references are imperfect or ambiguous. It probes whether the model can correctly identify existing objects, detect non-existent references, and generate plausible alternative objects based on spatial and semantic reasoning.
## Datasets
- **IRef-VLA** — total 4700000; splits: train (-1), val (-1), test (-1); repo https://github.com/HaochenZ11/IRef-VLA
## Metrics
- `score_sim` **(primary)** — range: [0, 1]
- Calculates the normalized weighted match between aspects of the original referential statement S and the suggested alternative S'. Aspects (classes, attributes, spatial relations) are weighted by importance (λ_i). Formula: score_sim = Σ(λ_i * 1{a_i ∈ A(S')}) / Σ(λ_i).
- `TP/FP/TN/FN` — range: other
- Binary classification counts used to assess how well the model identifies object existence based on the referential statement.
## Input / output format
**Input**: A referential statement (S) describing a target object within a 3D scene.
**Output**: Either the identified object if it exists, or an explicit indication that the object was not found, followed by a suggested alternative object.
## Scoring recipe
```python
def compute_grounding_metrics(predictions, golds):
tp = sum(1 for p, g in zip(predictions, golds) if p == g == 'exists')
fp = sum(1 for p, g in zip(predictions, golds) if p == 'exists' and g != 'exists')
tn = sum(1 for p, g in zip(predictions, golds) if p != 'exists' and g != 'exists')
fn = sum(1 for p, g in zip(predictions, golds) if p != 'exists' and g == 'exists')
return tp, fp, tn, fn
def compute_score_sim(statement_aspects, alt_aspects, weights):
numerator = sum(w * (1 if aspect in alt_aspects else 0) for aspect, w in zip(statement_aspects, weights))
denominator = sum(weights)
return numerator / denominator if denominator > 0 else 0.0
```
## Common pitfalls
- Assuming the referred object always exists in the scene, unlike standard referential grounding benchmarks that only require retrieval.
- Relying solely on the heuristic score_sim metric, which may not fully capture human intent; the authors note human-labeled scores are preferable but scale-limited.
- Confusing this task with embodied navigation benchmarks (e.g., ObjectNav) that evaluate agent planning and movement rather than pure language-to-object grounding.
## Evidence (verbatim from paper)
> For the grounding and search subtask, we use binary classification metrics—true positive (TP), false positive (FP), true negative (TN), and false negative (FN)—to assess how well the model can identify object existence based on a referential statement.
To quantitatively assess the quality of retrieved object alternatives, we use a heuristic scoring system. We calculate a similarity score $score_{sim}$ based on how well each suggestion matches aspects of the referential statement, such as object classes, attributes, and spatial relations.
## Citation
```bibtex
@misc{zhang2025irefvla,
title={IRef-VLA: A Benchmark for Interactive Referential Grounding with Imperfect Language in 3D Scenes},
author={Zhang et al. (2025)},
year={2025},
note={arXiv:2503.17406}
}
```
- arXiv: 2503.17406
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!