user: text: Write a concise one-sentence TLDR summary of the scientific paper content below.

Title: CATER: A diagnostic dataset for Compositional Actions & TEmporal Reasoning

Paper content:
Computer vision has undergone a dramatic revolution in performance, driven in large part through deep features trained on large-scale supervised datasets.
However, much of these improvements have focused on static image analysis; video understanding has seen rather modest improvements.
Even though new datasets and spatiotemporal models have been proposed, simple frame-by-frame classification methods often still remain competitive.
We posit that current video datasets are plagued with implicit biases over scene and object structure that can dwarf variations in temporal structure.
In this work, we build a video dataset with fully observable and controllable object and scene bias, and which truly requires spatiotemporal understanding in order to be solved.
Our dataset, named CATER, is rendered synthetically using a library of standard 3D objects, and tests the ability to recognize compositions of object movements that require long-term reasoning.
In addition to being a challenging dataset, CATER also provides a plethora of diagnostic tools to analyze modern spatiotemporal video architectures by being completely observable and controllable.
Using CATER, we provide insights into some of the most recent state of the art deep video architectures.
While deep features have revolutionized static image analysis, video descriptors have struggled to outperform classic hand-crafted descriptors (Wang & Schmid, 2013) .
Though recent works have shown improvements by merging image and video models by inflating 2D models to 3D (Carreira & Zisserman, 2017; Feichtenhofer et al., 2016) , simpler 2D models (Wang et al., 2016b) still routinely appear among top performers in video benchmarks such as the Kinetics Challenge at CVPR'17.
This raises the natural question: are videos trivially understandable by simply averaging the predictions over a sampled set of frames?
At some level, the answer must be no. Reasoning about high-level cognitive concepts such as intentions, goals, and causal relations requires reasoning over long-term temporal structure and order (Shoham, 1987; Bobick, 1997) .
Consider, for example, the movie clip in Fig. 1 (a) , where an actor leaves the table, grabs a firearm from another room, and returns.
Even though no gun is visible in the final frames, an observer can easily infer that the actor is surreptitiously carrying the gun.
Needless to say, any single frame from the video seems incapable of supporting that inference, and one needs to reason over space and time in order to reach that conclusion.
As a simpler instance of the problem, consider the cup-and-balls magic routine 1 , or the gamblingbased shell game 2 , as shown in Fig. 1
(b) .
In these games, an operator puts a target object (ball) under one of multiple container objects (cups), and moves them about, possibly revealing the target at various times and recursively containing cups within other cups.
The task at the end is to tell which of the cups is covering the ball.
Even in its simplest instantiation, one can expect any human or computer system that solves this task to require the ability to model state of the world over long temporal horizons, reason about occlusion, understand the spatiotemporal implications of containment, etc.
An important aspect of both our motivating examples is the adversarial nature of the task, where the operator in control is trying to make the observer fail.
Needless to say, a frame by frame prediction model would be incapable of solving such tasks.
Figure 1: Real world video understanding.
Consider this iconic movie scene from The Godfather in
(a), where the protagonist leaves the table, goes to the bathroom to extract a hidden firearm, and returns to the table presumably with the intentions of shooting a person.
While the gun itself is visible in only a few frames of the whole clip, it is trivial for us to realize that the protagonist has it in the last frame.
An even simpler instantiation of such a reasoning task could be the cup-and-ball shell game in
(b) , where the task is to determine which of the cups contain the ball at the end of the trick.
Can we design similarly hard tasks for computers?
Given these motivating examples, why don't spatiotemporal models dramatically outperform their static counterparts for video understanding?
We posit that this is due to limitations of existing video benchmarks.
Even though video datasets have evolved from the small regime with tens of labels (Soomro et al., 2012; Kuehne et al., 2011; Schuldt et al., 2004) to large with hundreds of labels (Sigurdsson et al., 2016; Kay et al., 2017) , tasks have remained highly correlated to the scene and object context.
For example, it is trivial to recognize a swimming action given a swimming pool in the background (He et al., 2016b) .
This is further reinforced by the fact that state of the art pose-based action recognition models are outperformed by simpler frame-level models (Wang et al., 2016b) on the Kinetics (Kay et al., 2017) benchmark, with a difference of nearly 45% in accuracy!
Sigurdsson et al. also found similar results for their Charades (Sigurdsson et al., 2016) benchmark, where adding ground truth object information gave the largest boosts to action recognition performance (Sigurdsson et al., 2017) .
In this work, we take an alternate approach to developing a video understanding dataset.
Inspired by the recent CLEVR dataset (Johnson et al., 2017) (that explores spatial reasoning in tabletop scenes) and inspired by the adversarial parlor games above (that require temporal reasoning), we introduce CATER, a diagnostic dataset for Compositional Actions and TEmporal Reasoning in dynamic tabletop scenes.
We define three tasks on the dataset, each with an increasingly higher level of complexity, but set up as classification problems in order to be comparable to existing benchmarks for easy transfer of existing models and approaches.
Specifically, we consider primitive action recognition, compositional action recognition, and adversarial target tracking under occlusion and containment.
However, note that this does not limit the usability of our dataset to these tasks, and we provide full metadata with the rendered videos that can be used for more complex, structured prediction tasks like detection, tracking, forecasting, and so on.
Our dataset does not model an operator (or hand) moving the tabletop objects, though this could be simulated as well in future variants, as in (Rogez et al., 2015) .
Being synthetic, CATER can easily be scaled up in size and complexity.
It also allows for detailed model diagnostics by controlling various dataset generation parameters.
We use CATER to benchmark state-of-the-art video understanding models Hochreiter & Schmidhuber, 1997) , and show even the best models struggle on our dataset.
We also uncover some insights into the behavior of these models by changing parameters such as the temporal duration of an occlusion, the degree of camera motion, etc., which are difficult to both tune and label in real-world video data.
We use CATER to analyze several leading network designs on hard spatiotemporal tasks.
We find most models struggle on our proposed dataset, especially on the snitch localization task which requires long term reasoning.
Interestingly, average pooling clip predictions or short temporal cues (optical flow) perform rather poorly on CATER, unlike most previous benchmarks.
Such temporal reasoning challenges are common in the real world (eg.
Fig.
1
(a) ), and solving those would be the cornerstone of the next improvements in machine video understanding.
We believe CATER would serve as an intermediary in building systems that will reason over space and time to understand actions.
That said, CATER is, by no means, a complete solution to the video understanding problem.
Like any other synthetic or simulated dataset, it should be considered in addition to real world benchmarks.
While we have focused on classification tasks for simplicity, our fully-annotated dataset can be used for much richer parsing tasks such as spacetime action localization.
One of our findings is that while high-level semantic tasks such as activity recognition may be addressable with current architectures given a richly labeled dataset, "mid-level" tasks such as tracking still pose tremendous challenges, particularly under long-term occlusions and containment.
We believe addressing such challenges will enable broader temporal reasoning tasks that capture intentions, goals, and causal behavior.
We analyze the top most confident
a) correct and
b) incorrect predictions on the test videos for localization task.
For each video, we show the last frame, followed by a top-down view of the 6 × 6 grid.
The grid is further overlayed with:
1) the ground truth positions of the snitch over time, shown as the golden trail, which fades in color over time =⇒ brighter yellow depicts later positions; and
2) the softmax prediction confidence scores for each location (black is low, white is high).
The model has easiest time classifying the location when the snitch does not move much or moves early on in the video.
Full video in supplementary.

assistant: text: We propose a new video understanding benchmark, with tasks that by-design require temporal reasoning to be solved, unlike most existing video datasets.