Track, Then Bind solved both VET-Bench tasks without training, and lifted a video model on the hardest shell-game questions from 41.5% to 55.4%
AspireAI community · arXiv (College of William & Mary / SparcAI)
Video-language models can recognize an object in a single frame but lose track of which object is which once the identifying evidence disappears or the objects look alike. Track, Then Bind splits the job in two: a promptable tracker follows candidate objects and draws them with a track number, a frozen vision-language model answers one static question about the visible identifying evidence to bind the target to a track, and the answer is then read off the tracked state in text instead of re-interpreting the original video. With Qwen3-VL-32B and no training, it solved both VET-Bench tasks, where a fine-tuned trajectory model reaches 92% and 90% and the same model voting over 16 samples stays at 30-32%, and it answered 55.4% of the hardest Perception Test cup games against 41.5% for the best published model. The method is not free: the agent inherits the tracker's errors, identical cups crossed by hand still swap tracks, and it issues roughly 11 vision-language calls per question even when a question needs no tracking.
Read the story and explore more from the AspireAI community.
Two sparse-autoencoder analyses have resisted scaling: matching semantically similar features across layers, and compressing large feature circuits into interpretable supernodes. This paper argues both are the same underlying problem, estimating semantic distances between SAE features that sit on different activation manifolds. Its representation treats each feature not as a single decoder vector but as an activation-weighted distribution over the hidden states expressing it, projects those distributions into a shared reference space, and compares them with Wasserstein distance. The representation is proved invariant to activation rescaling and stable under perturbation, and recovers true matches under finite-sample margin conditions. Empirically it outperformed decoder-vector and LLM-based baselines and captured subtle functional distinctions between related features, and it compressed large feature circuits into interpretable supernodes automatically. The limitation is that this is interpretability tooling: the paper demonstrates better feature matching and circuit compression, not that downstream interpretability claims become more accurate.