Cited by 35Multimodal Machine Learning ApplicationsRobot Manipulation and LearningReinforcement Learning in Robotics

Learning from Unlabeled 3D Environments for Vision-and-Language Navigation

Open access
Chen, Shizhe, Guhur, Pierre-Louis, Tapaswi, Makarand, Schmid, Cordelia, Laptev, Ivan·2022·Lecture Notes in Computer Science

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/978-3-031-19842-7_37

Cites

9 of 9 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • AutoVLN builds graphs with very sparse nodes and edges that go across obstacles, limiting the quantity of sampled data and leading to impractical trajectories.

    “Previous work AutoVLN [17] builds graphs with very sparse nodes and with edges that go across obstacles, limiting the quantity of sampled data and leading to impractical trajectories”

    From Scaling Data Generation in Vision-and-Language Navigation (2023) · cites this paper as [17]

    Section 3.1 (p. 5–6) says AutoVLN connects nodes only when they are visible and navigable from each other, contrary to the claim that edges cross obstacles. The paper also describes its dataset as large-scale and says it creates over 200,000 realistic training samples (Introduction, p. 2); it does not report that its graph limits sampling or produces impractical trajectories. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The created dataset is 3.81 times larger than the augmented dataset in AutoVLN.

    “and ˆ 3.81 larger than the augmented dataset in AutoVLN [17].”

    From Scaling Data Generation in Vision-and-Language Navigation (2023) · cites this paper as [17]

    Section 3.3 (Table 1, p. 8) reports that the created HM3D-AutoVLN dataset has 217,703 instructions and is larger than the augmented REVERIE-Speaker dataset, which has 19,636. The paper does not identify an augmented dataset in AutoVLN for which the comparison is 3.81 times, so it supports the general size comparison but not the stated multiplier and comparator. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Scaling up the diversity of environments and the quantity of demonstration for training VLN agents is promising for improving generalization to unseen scenes.

    “Recent research shows that scaling up the diversity of environments and the quantity of demonstration for training VLN agents are promising in improving generalization to unseen scenes [17, 37].”

    From Scaling Data Generation in Vision-and-Language Navigation (2023) · cites this paper as [17]

  • ScaleVLN achieves state-of-the-art performance on object grounding task on the test leaderboard, comparable to the previous best method AutoVLN.

    “ScaleVLN achieves state-of-the-art performance on object grounding task on the test leaderboard, comparable to the previous best method AutoVLN [17].”

    From Scaling Data Generation in Vision-and-Language Navigation (2023) · cites this paper as [17]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. [1]1. Anderson, P., Shrivastava, A., Parikh, D., Batra, D., Lee, S.: Chasing ghosts: In- struction following as bayesian state tracking. NeurIPS 32 (2019) 3
  2. [2]2. Anderson, P., Shrivastava, A., Truong, J., Majumdar, A., Parikh, D., Batra, D., Lee, S.: Sim-to-real transfer for vision-and-language navigation. In: CoRL. pp. 671–
  3. [681]681. PMLR (2021) 4
  4. [3]3. Anderson, P., Wu, Q., Teney, D., Bruce, J., Johnson, M., Sünderhauf, N., Reid, I., Gould, S., Van Den Hengel, A.: Vision-and-language navigation: Interpreting visually-grounded navigation instructions in real environments. In: CVPR. pp. 3674–3683 (2018) 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 14

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Chen, S., Guhur, P.-L., Tapaswi, M., Schmid, C., & Laptev, I.
Affiliations
  • Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR)
  • International Institute of Information Technology, Hyderabad (IN)
Venue
Lecture Notes in Computer Science
Published
2022
Pages
638-655
ISSN
  • 0302-9743 (ISSN-L)
  • 1611-3349
OpenAlex
W4293329554
Cited by
35
References
9
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 12
FWCI
2.92
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Lecture notes in computer science (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
  • Agence Nationale de la Recherche (ANR-19-P3IA-0001)
  • Grand Équipement National De Calcul Intensif
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Multimodal Machine Learning Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Control and Systems Engineering › Robot Manipulation and Learning
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Reinforcement Learning in Robotics
Keywords
vision-and-language navigation, HM3D, pseudo-labeling, cross-view consistency, navigation graph, instruction generation, language model fine-tuning, dataset construction, generalization to unseen environments

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review