Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 54 references

MambaVLT: Time-Evolving Multimodal State Space Model for Vision-Language Tracking

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read MambaVLT claims that a time-evolving state space memory can memorize long-term target features and selectively update reference features, outperforming Transformer-based vision-language trackers on several benchmarks.

desk verdict A plausible first Mamba-based VLT with a fresh memory idea, but the long-term retention claim is unsupported and possibly contradicted by its own Eq. (6). read the letter →

arxiv 2411.15459 v1 pith:MSM7YQ4J submitted 2024-11-23 cs.CV

Xinqi Liu , Li Zhou , Zikun Zhou , Jianqiu Chen , Zhenyu He This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CV
keywords vision-languagetrackingstatespacemodelMambatemporalmemoryreferencefeatureupdatemultimodalfusionobjectcontrastivelearning
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper argues that the selective state space model Mamba can supply the temporal memory that vision-language tracking currently lacks. Rather than re-extracting a context prompt at every frame as Transformer-based trackers do, MambaVLT carries the final hidden state of each Mamba layer across frames and blends it with a learnable state, so the reference features for the target update continuously. The authors report that on the TNL2K and OTB99 benchmarks this continuous state-space approach raises the AUC of the best prior trackers by 0.6% and 2.3%, respectively, and it also improves results on the MGIT benchmark. To make the memory mechanism visible, they design a semi-reference-free protocol in which the reference is used only in the first frame; the tracker still localizes the target in subsequent frames using the retained state. The paper's central suggestion, if correct, is that recurrent state-space memory is a competitive alternative to Transformer context prompts for long-term multimodal tracking.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is the Hybrid Multimodal State Space (HMSS) block with its time-evolving hybrid state space memory. Each HMSS block treats the final hidden state of a Mamba-style selective scan as a continuous memory token that is passed from one frame to the next, forming a multi-level state space memory $\mathcal{S}$ over the $M$ blocks. A modality-guided bidirectional scan orders the input sequence so that search-region tokens always come last, with the text and template features swapped to guide the autoregressive update in two passes; shared parameters $B, C, D$ control feature extraction while separate matrices $A^\alpha$ and $A^\beta$ act as state-space update gates for the two scan orders. A Selective Locality Enhancement (SLE) block adds a global selective map $A^l$ generated by a convolution on the HMSS output, then applies a sliding-window linear-attention scan to strengthen intra-modal and inter-modal correlation of the current frame while keeping complexity linear.

What would settle it

Take the semi-reference-free setting on a full long-video benchmark such as LaSOT: remove the reference after the first frame, run MambaVLT, and plot AUC against track length. If localization accuracy drops steeply within a few hundred frames, the cross-frame state does not retain target information over long horizons; if the curve stays close to the full-reference baseline, the memory is genuinely long-term.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that a time-evolving state space can memorize long-term historical target features and selectively update reference features during tracking. MambaVLT stores the final hidden state $H^{fin}_{t-1}$ from each of its four fusion modules, for both text-first and template-first scan orders, and initializes the next frame's state as a convex blend of a learnable state and the stored final state, $H^{ini}_t = a H^l + (1-a) H^{fin}_{t-1}$. A modality-guided bidirectional scan with shared feature-extraction gates but distinct state-transition matrices $A^\alpha$ and $A^\beta$ then updates and fuses the language and template references before the search-region tokens are processed. The authors show qualitatively on selected sequences that, under the semi-reference-free setting, the tracker continues to localize the target after the reference is removed, and quantitatively that the full model outperforms state-of-the-art trackers on TNL2K, OTB99, and MGIT across several reference settings, while its results on LaSOT remain below the strongest baseline.

Load-bearing premise

The method assumes that the hidden state carried across frames retains enough global target information to guide tracking and does not accumulate drift over long videos; the paper tests this only qualitatively on a few selected sequences, not across a whole benchmark.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the central claim holds, discrete context-prompt extractors and decoders are not necessary: the state-space memory alone carries target history across frames.
  • The linear-complexity scans in Mamba make the approach scale better to long videos and larger search regions than the quadratic attention used by Transformer trackers.
  • The semi-reference-free result implies that occasional loss of the reference, such as a dropped language description, does not have to break tracking because the remembered state can substitute.
  • The modality-selection module lets the tracker down-weight whichever reference, language or visual, has become unreliable at a given time, reducing ambiguity.
  • The reported gains on TNL2K, OTB99, and MGIT suggest the approach transfers across benchmarks and reference settings, with LaSOT as the notable weaker spot.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • An extension the paper leaves implicit is a controlled stress test: inject the reference only at frame 1, then measure when the memory degrades under occlusion or appearance change on the full benchmark rather than selected sequences.
  • The same time-evolving state mechanism could transfer to other multimodal streaming tasks, such as video grounding or video question answering, where reference features must be updated as the scene evolves.
  • One could combine the state memory with an uncertainty estimate that decides when to re-inject the original reference, turning the drift risk into a recoverable event.
  • The comparison with discrete prompt updaters suggests a clean ablation the paper does not run: replace the state-space memory with a Transformer cross-attention memory of the same capacity and compare long-video performance directly.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper proposes MambaVLT, a vision-language tracker built around a Mamba (state space model) backbone. The core novelty is a time-evolving multimodal fusion (TEMF) module with a hybrid multimodal state space (HMSS) block that carries a state-space memory across frames, a selective locality enhancement (SLE) block, and a modality-selection module that dynamically weights visual and language references. The paper also introduces a 'semi-reference-free' (SRF) tracking protocol in which reference data is used only in the first frame, as evidence of long-term memory. Experiments are reported on TNL2K, LaSOT, OTB99, and MGIT under BBOX, NL, and NL&BBOX reference settings, with claims of state-of-the-art results on TNL2K, OTB99, and MGIT, while acknowledging losses on LaSOT.

Significance. If the central claim holds, the paper would demonstrate that an SSM-based continuous state-space memory can replace discrete Transformer context-prompt updating in vision-language tracking, achieving competitive accuracy with linear complexity in sequence length. The proposed SRF protocol is a creative and potentially useful evaluation tool for isolating the contribution of reference-memory retention. The paper also includes efficiency comparisons and ablation studies. However, the load-bearing evidence for the long-term retention mechanism is currently qualitative and limited to selected sequences, and the parameter controlling memory decay is unspecified, so the significance of the architectural claim is not yet established at the level the paper asserts.

major comments (3)
  1. [Table 1, Section 4.3] The long-term retention claim is not quantitatively supported. Eq. (6) defines the initial state for frame t as Hini_t = aHl + (1-a)Hfin_{t-1}; the paper does not state the value of a, whether it is learned, or whether it is annealed. If a is a fixed positive constant, the contribution of any past state is discounted geometrically with a forgetting time constant of about 1/a frames. The SRF experiments in Fig. 5 and Supplementary B.3 are qualitative and on a handful of hand-picked sequences, so they do not establish retention over the hundreds of frames in benchmarks like LaSOT. Please report the value or learning schedule of a, and provide quantitative full-benchmark SRF results (e.g., SRF AUC on TNL2K and LaSOT) or a memory-retention curve showing performance versus frame distance from the reference. Without this, the statement 'the state space memory evolves temporally and memorizes long-term target information naturally' is an unsupported assertion about the mechanism that is central to the paper's contribution.
  2. [Table 1, Section 4.3] The ablations in Table 3 are confined to TNL2K and do not include a long-video benchmark. The time-evolving hybrid state space (THSS) component, which is the paper's central mechanism, adds only 1.2-1.9 AUC on TNL2K, and its benefit on longer sequences (LaSOT) is not measured. Given the paper's title and main claim, ablations on LaSOT or at least a breakdown of performance by sequence length are needed to establish that the proposed memory mechanism is what drives the reported gains. Without such evidence, the contribution of the state-space memory to long-term tracking remains unsubstantiated.
  3. [Table 2, Supplementary B.1] The MGIT comparison protocol is ambiguous. Table 2 reports results 'based on the official reproduction results' and lists AUC only for the proposed method while other trackers show '-' for AUC, so the reader cannot directly compare AUC across methods. Supplementary B.1 introduces a success rate (SR) metric and evaluates a variant MambaVLT* that updates language descriptions during inference without retraining; it is unclear whether the claims in Section 4.3 (e.g., 'improves the PRE metric by 14.4% on MGIT') refer to the standard or the language-updating variant, and whether other methods were given the same opportunity to use updated descriptions. Please clarify the exact protocol used for each number and make the comparisons apples-to-apples.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Throughout] There are several typos and formatting issues: 'serch' in Section 3.2, 'resutls' in Section 2.1, 'Nortm' in Figure 3, and the reference list contains entries with irregular formatting. A careful proofread is needed.
  2. [Figure 3] The symbol '?' appears repeatedly in the figure in place of mathematical notation, making the figure hard to interpret. Please replace these with the actual operators or variables.
  3. [Section 4.2] The SRF protocol description says the tracker must 'retain the target information embedded within the reference data and subsequently locate the target in search regions solely through the retained target information'; however, it is not specified whether the language description is also removed after the first frame in the NL and NL&BBOX SRF settings. Please state explicitly which inputs are removed and which are retained in each SRF configuration.
  4. [Section 3.3, Eq. (7)] The claim that A^alpha_i and A^beta_i act as 'state space update gates' is unclear: are these matrices input-dependent (as in Mamba) or fixed per scan order? If they are input-dependent, clarify how they are generated; if fixed, the term 'selective update' is misleading.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the paper's performance claims are benchmarked against external trackers, and the state-space memory claim is evaluated through a distinct semi-reference-free protocol rather than restated from the training objective.

full rationale

We inspected the claimed derivation chain for circular reductions. In Eq. (6), the initial state is defined as Hini_t = a Hl + (1-a) Hfin_{t-1}, where Hl and a are architectural components; a is not fitted to the reported benchmark metrics, and no reported AUC or precision value is defined as a function of a. The long-term-retention claim is an architectural assumption that is tested by the semi-reference-free (SRF) protocol in Sec. 4.2 and Supp. B.3, where reference inputs are removed after the first frame. That protocol is a distinct evaluation setting, not a restatement of the training objective or of the leaderboard numbers. The ablation in Table 3 compares variants of the full model; the reported AUC differences are empirical increments from adding modules, not identities by construction. The paper's self-citations, notably JointNLT [53] in Related Work and Table 1, are prior-work comparisons and are not load-bearing justifications for the present architecture; no uniqueness theorem is imported from the authors, and no known result is merely renamed. Self-reported limitations, such as suboptimal LaSOT results and the qualitative-only SRF evidence, indicate that the benchmark outcomes are not forced by the paper's definitions. The main weaknesses are evidential—no quantitative memory-retention analysis on whole benchmarks and SRF results shown only for selected sequences—which is a correctness and evidence-quality concern, not circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The central claims rest mainly on architectural design choices and assumptions about state space memory behavior, plus several hand-set hyperparameters. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (4)
  • State-space mix ratio a
    Equation 6 blends the learnable state Hl with the previous final state Hfin_{t-1}; the value is learned during training and not reported.
  • Template update confidence threshold = 0.8
    The prediction head updates the template video clip only if the target score exceeds this hand-set threshold (Supplementary A.1).
  • Template clip length L = 3 (per Table B)
    Number of frames in the template video clip; chosen for efficiency, but no ablation on L is shown.
  • Number of TEMF modules M = 4
    Depth of the time-evolving fusion module; chosen by design, no sensitivity study is provided.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The final state space of a Mamba layer contains global information of all processed tokens.
    Invoked in Section 3.3 to justify using Hfin_{t-1} as a memory of the whole video so far.
  • domain assumption Placing the search region at the end of the scan sequence lets it gather reference information.
    Stated in Section 3.3 for the modality-guided bidirectional scan.
  • domain assumption Shared B, C, D parameters with distinct A gates suffice for multimodal fusion.
    Design choice in Eq. 7 to reduce redundancy while enabling different scan orders.
  • domain assumption A template video clip of L frames captures the appearance change of the target.
    The paper uses L-frame template clips as reference input (Section 3.2) without validating L.
  • domain assumption Pretrained Mamba-130m and Vmamba-tiny encoders transfer to tracking.
    The text and vision encoders are initialized from these pretrained models.
invented entities (1)
  • Multi-level state space memory
    purpose: Stores final state spaces of TEMF modules across frames to retain long-term target information and initialize subsequent states.
    This is the core new mechanism, but its claimed capability is only demonstrated qualitatively via the semi-reference-free tracking on a few sequences, not by independent external evidence.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of MambaVLT: Time-Evolving Multimodal State Space Model for Vision-Language Tracking." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/MSM7YQ4J

@misc{pith2026241115459,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: MambaVLT: Time-Evolving Multimodal State Space Model for Vision-Language Tracking},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/MSM7YQ4J}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.15459}
}
read the original abstract

The vision-language tracking task aims to perform object tracking based on various modality references. Existing Transformer-based vision-language tracking methods have made remarkable progress by leveraging the global modeling ability of self-attention. However, current approaches still face challenges in effectively exploiting the temporal information and dynamically updating reference features during tracking. Recently, the State Space Model (SSM), known as Mamba, has shown astonishing ability in efficient long-sequence modeling. Particularly, its state space evolving process demonstrates promising capabilities in memorizing multimodal temporal information with linear complexity. Witnessing its success, we propose a Mamba-based vision-language tracking model to exploit its state space evolving ability in temporal space for robust multimodal tracking, dubbed MambaVLT. In particular, our approach mainly integrates a time-evolving hybrid state space block and a selective locality enhancement block, to capture contextual information for multimodal modeling and adaptive reference feature update. Besides, we introduce a modality-selection module that dynamically adjusts the weighting between visual and language references, mitigating potential ambiguities from either reference type. Extensive experimental results show that our method performs favorably against state-of-the-art trackers across diverse benchmarks.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.15459 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Illustration of two ways for capturing temporal con [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Overview of the MambaVLT. Given various modality reference settings, features are initially extracted and aligned, then for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Overall pipeline of the Hybrid Multimodal State Space Block. The multimodal feature includes language feature [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Overview of modality-selection module. wl and wz represents the weights of language invariant clue Pl and template invariant clue Pz. the intra-modal dependency. Al is responsible for extract￾ing the selective information as a global map. In this man￾ner, the SLE block…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Qualitative comparison of NL&BBOX tracking task on two challenging sequences to analyze the effectiveness of state space. The line graphs represent the IoU of different trackers for each frame. The SRF means semi-reference-free tracking setting. 4.3. Comparison with st…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Visualization of the similarity between reference token [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

54 extracted references · 33 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Long- former: The long-document transformer

    Iz Beltagy, Matthew E Peters, and Arman Cohan. Long- former: The long-document transformer. arXiv preprint arXiv:2004.05150, 2020. 5

    arXiv 2004

  2. [2]

    Fully-convolutional siamese networks for object tracking

    Luca Bertinetto, Jack Valmadre, Joao F Henriques, Andrea Vedaldi, and Philip HS Torr. Fully-convolutional siamese networks for object tracking. In Computer Vision–ECCV 2016 Workshops: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, October 8- 10 and 15-16, 2016, Proceedings, Part II 14, pages 850–865. Springer, 2016. 2

    work page 2016

  3. [3]

    Learning discriminative model prediction for track- ing

    Goutam Bhat, Martin Danelljan, Luc Van Gool, and Radu Timofte. Learning discriminative model prediction for track- ing. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF international confer- ence on computer vision, pages 6182–6191, 2019. 2

    work page 2019

  4. [4]

    Transformer tracking

    Xin Chen, Bin Yan, Jiawen Zhu, Dong Wang, Xiaoyun Yang, and Huchuan Lu. Transformer tracking. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 8126–8135, 2021. 2, 7

    work page 2021

  5. [5]

    Mixformer: End-to-end tracking with iterative mixed atten- tion

    Yutao Cui, Cheng Jiang, Limin Wang, and Gangshan Wu. Mixformer: End-to-end tracking with iterative mixed atten- tion. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on com- puter vision and pattern recognition , pages 13608–13618,

  6. [6]

    Eco: Efficient convolution operators for tracking

    Martin Danelljan, Goutam Bhat, Fahad Shahbaz Khan, and Michael Felsberg. Eco: Efficient convolution operators for tracking. In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 6638–6646,

    work page

  7. [7]

    Lasot: A high-quality benchmark for large-scale single ob- ject tracking

    Heng Fan, Liting Lin, Fan Yang, Peng Chu, Ge Deng, Sijia Yu, Hexin Bai, Yong Xu, Chunyuan Liao, and Haibin Ling. Lasot: A high-quality benchmark for large-scale single ob- ject tracking. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 5374–5383,

  8. [8]

    Robust visual object tracking with natural language region proposal network

    Qi Feng, Vitaly Ablavsky, Qinxun Bai, and Stan Sclaroff. Robust visual object tracking with natural language region proposal network. arXiv preprint arXiv:1912.02048, 1(7):8,

    arXiv 1912

Show all 54 references
  1. [9]

    Real-time visual object tracking with natural lan- guage description

    Qi Feng, Vitaly Ablavsky, Qinxun Bai, Guorong Li, and Stan Sclaroff. Real-time visual object tracking with natural lan- guage description. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF winter conference on applications of computer vision , pages 700– 709, 2020. 7

    2020

  2. [10]

    Siamese natural language tracker: Tracking by natural lan- guage descriptions with siamese trackers

    Qi Feng, Vitaly Ablavsky, Qinxun Bai, and Stan Sclaroff. Siamese natural language tracker: Tracking by natural lan- guage descriptions with siamese trackers. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 5851–5860, 2021. 3, 7

    2021

  3. [11]

    Hungry hungry hippos: To- wards language modeling with state space models

    Daniel Y Fu, Tri Dao, Khaled K Saab, Armin W Thomas, Atri Rudra, and Christopher R´e. Hungry hungry hippos: To- wards language modeling with state space models. Interna- tional Conference on Learning Representations, 2022. 3

    2022

  4. [12]

    Stmtrack: Template-free visual tracking with space-time memory networks

    Zhihong Fu, Qingjie Liu, Zehua Fu, and Yunhong Wang. Stmtrack: Template-free visual tracking with space-time memory networks. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF con- ference on computer vision and pattern recognition , pages 13774–13783, 2021. 2

    2021

  5. [13]

    Generalized relation modeling for transformer tracking

    Shenyuan Gao, Chunluan Zhou, and Jun Zhang. Generalized relation modeling for transformer tracking. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 18686–18695, 2023. 1, 7, 8

    2023

  6. [14]

    Mamba: Linear-time sequence modeling with selective state spaces

    Albert Gu and Tri Dao. Mamba: Linear-time sequence modeling with selective state spaces. arXiv preprint arXiv:2312.00752, 2023. 2, 3, 6

    2023 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Efficiently mod- eling long sequences with structured state spaces

    Albert Gu, Karan Goel, and Christopher R´e. Efficiently mod- eling long sequences with structured state spaces. Interna- tional Conference on Learning Representations, 2021. 2, 3

    2021

  8. [16]

    Combining recurrent, convolutional, and continuous-time models with linear state space layers

    Albert Gu, Isys Johnson, Karan Goel, Khaled Saab, Tri Dao, Atri Rudra, and Christopher R ´e. Combining recurrent, convolutional, and continuous-time models with linear state space layers. Advances in neural information processing sys- tems, 34:572–585, 2021. 2

    2021

  9. [17]

    On the parameterization and initialization of diagonal state space models

    Albert Gu, Karan Goel, Ankit Gupta, and Christopher R ´e. On the parameterization and initialization of diagonal state space models. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 35:35971–35983, 2022. 2

    2022

  10. [18]

    Mambair: A simple baseline for image restoration with state-space model

    Hang Guo, Jinmin Li, Tao Dai, Zhihao Ouyang, Xudong Ren, and Shu-Tao Xia. Mambair: A simple baseline for image restoration with state-space model. In ECCV, 2024. 3

    2024

  11. [19]

    Divert more attention to vision-language tracking

    Mingzhe Guo, Zhipeng Zhang, Heng Fan, and Liping Jing. Divert more attention to vision-language tracking. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , 35:4446–4460,

  12. [20]

    Demystify mamba in vision: A linear attention perspective

    Dongchen Han, Ziyi Wang, Zhuofan Xia, Yizeng Han, Yi- fan Pu, Chunjiang Ge, Jun Song, Shiji Song, Bo Zheng, and Gao Huang. Demystify mamba in vision: A linear attention perspective. arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.16605, 2024. 5

    2024 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Mambaad: Exploring state space models for multi-class unsupervised anomaly detec- tion

    Haoyang He, Yuhu Bai, Jiangning Zhang, Qingdong He, Hongxu Chen, Zhenye Gan, Chengjie Wang, Xiangtai Li, Guanzhong Tian, and Lei Xie. Mambaad: Exploring state space models for multi-class unsupervised anomaly detec- tion. arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.06564, 2024. 3, 2

    2024 arXiv

  14. [22]

    High-speed tracking with kernelized correlation fil- ters

    Jo ˜ao F Henriques, Rui Caseiro, Pedro Martins, and Jorge Batista. High-speed tracking with kernelized correlation fil- ters. IEEE transactions on pattern analysis and machine in- telligence, 37(3):583–596, 2014. 2

    2014

  15. [23]

    A multi-modal global instance tracking benchmark (mgit): Better locating target in complex spatio-temporal and causal relationship

    Shiyu Hu, Dailing Zhang, Xiaokun Feng, Xuchen Li, Xin Zhao, Kaiqi Huang, et al. A multi-modal global instance tracking benchmark (mgit): Better locating target in complex spatio-temporal and causal relationship. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 36, 2024. 2, 6, 8, 1

    2024

  16. [24]

    Got-10k: A large high-diversity benchmark for generic object tracking in the wild

    Lianghua Huang, Xin Zhao, and Kaiqi Huang. Got-10k: A large high-diversity benchmark for generic object tracking in the wild. IEEE transactions on pattern analysis and machine intelligence, 43(5):1562–1577, 2019. 6

    2019

  17. [25]

    High performance visual tracking with siamese region pro- posal network

    Bo Li, Junjie Yan, Wei Wu, Zheng Zhu, and Xiaolin Hu. High performance visual tracking with siamese region pro- posal network. In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 8971–8980,

  18. [26]

    Siamrpn++: Evolution of siamese vi- sual tracking with very deep networks

    Bo Li, Wei Wu, Qiang Wang, Fangyi Zhang, Junliang Xing, and Junjie Yan. Siamrpn++: Evolution of siamese vi- sual tracking with very deep networks. In Proceedings of 9 the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 4282–4291, 2019. 2, 7

    2019

  19. [27]

    Videomamba: State space model for efficient video understanding

    Kunchang Li, Xinhao Li, Yi Wang, Yinan He, Yali Wang, Limin Wang, and Yu Qiao. Videomamba: State space model for efficient video understanding. arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.06977, 2024. 3, 5

    2024 arXiv

  20. [28]

    Cou- pled mamba: Enhanced multi-modal fusion with coupled state space model

    Wenbing Li, Hang Zhou, Zikai Song, and Wei Yang. Cou- pled mamba: Enhanced multi-modal fusion with coupled state space model. arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.18014, 2024. 3

    2024 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Cross- modal target retrieval for tracking by natural language

    Yihao Li, Jun Yu, Zhongpeng Cai, and Yuwen Pan. Cross- modal target retrieval for tracking by natural language. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vi- sion and Pattern Recognition , pages 4931–4940, 2022. 3, 7

    2022

  22. [30]

    Tracking by natural language specification

    Zhenyang Li, Ran Tao, Efstratios Gavves, Cees GM Snoek, and Arnold WM Smeulders. Tracking by natural language specification. In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 6495–6503,

  23. [31]

    MTMamba: Enhancing multi-task dense scene understanding by mamba-based de- coders

    Baijiong Lin, Weisen Jiang, Pengguang Chen, Yu Zhang, Shu Liu, and Ying-Cong Chen. MTMamba: Enhancing multi-task dense scene understanding by mamba-based de- coders. In European Conference on Computer Vision, 2024. 3

    2024

  24. [32]

    Swintrack: A simple and strong baseline for trans- former tracking

    Liting Lin, Heng Fan, Zhipeng Zhang, Yong Xu, and Haibin Ling. Swintrack: A simple and strong baseline for trans- former tracking. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 35:16743–16754, 2022. 1, 7

    2022

  25. [33]

    Vmamba: Visual state space model

    Yue Liu, Yunjie Tian, Yuzhong Zhao, Hongtian Yu, Lingxi Xie, Yaowei Wang, Qixiang Ye, and Yunfan Liu. Vmamba: Visual state space model. arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.10166,

    arXiv

  26. [34]

    Swin transformer: Hierarchical vision transformer using shifted windows

    Ze Liu, Yutong Lin, Yue Cao, Han Hu, Yixuan Wei, Zheng Zhang, Stephen Lin, and Baining Guo. Swin transformer: Hierarchical vision transformer using shifted windows. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF international conference on computer vision, pages 10012–10022, 2021. 2

    2021

  27. [35]

    Unifying visual and vision-language tracking via contrastive learning

    Yinchao Ma, Yuyang Tang, Wenfei Yang, Tianzhu Zhang, Jinpeng Zhang, and Mengxue Kang. Unifying visual and vision-language tracking via contrastive learning. In Pro- ceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence , pages 4107–4116, 2024. 1, 3, 7

    2024

  28. [36]

    Generation and comprehension of unambiguous object descriptions

    Junhua Mao, Jonathan Huang, Alexander Toshev, Oana Camburu, Alan L Yuille, and Kevin Murphy. Generation and comprehension of unambiguous object descriptions. In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 11–20, 2016. 6

    2016

  29. [37]

    Long range language modeling via gated state spaces

    Harsh Mehta, Ankit Gupta, Ashok Cutkosky, and Behnam Neyshabur. Long range language modeling via gated state spaces. arXiv preprint arXiv:2206.13947, 2022. 2

    2022 arXiv

  30. [38]

    Learning multi-domain convolutional neural networks for visual tracking

    Hyeonseob Nam and Bohyung Han. Learning multi-domain convolutional neural networks for visual tracking. In Pro- ceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pat- tern recognition, pages 4293–4302, 2016. 2

    2016

  31. [39]

    Context-aware integration of lan- guage and visual references for natural language tracking

    Yanyan Shao, Shuting He, Qi Ye, Yuchao Feng, Wenhan Luo, and Jiming Chen. Context-aware integration of lan- guage and visual references for natural language tracking. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vi- sion and Pattern Recognition, pages 19208–19217, 202...

    2024

  32. [40]

    Multi-scale vmamba: Hierarchy in hierarchy visual state space model

    Yuheng Shi, Minjing Dong, and Chang Xu. Multi-scale vmamba: Hierarchy in hierarchy visual state space model. arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.14174, 2024. 3

    2024 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Simplified state space layers for sequence model- ing

    Jimmy TH Smith, Andrew Warrington, and Scott W Lin- derman. Simplified state space layers for sequence model- ing. International Conference on Learning Representations,

  34. [42]

    Fast template matching and update for video object tracking and segmentation

    Mingjie Sun, Jimin Xiao, Eng Gee Lim, Bingfeng Zhang, and Yao Zhao. Fast template matching and update for video object tracking and segmentation. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 10791–10799, 2020. 2

    2020

  35. [43]

    Transformer meets tracker: Exploiting temporal context for robust visual tracking

    Ning Wang, Wengang Zhou, Jie Wang, and Houqiang Li. Transformer meets tracker: Exploiting temporal context for robust visual tracking. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF con- ference on computer vision and pattern recognition , pages 1571–1580, 2021. 7

    2021

  36. [44]

    Towards more flexible and accurate object tracking with natural language: Algo- rithms and benchmark

    Xiao Wang, Xiujun Shu, Zhipeng Zhang, Bo Jiang, Yaowei Wang, Yonghong Tian, and Feng Wu. Towards more flexible and accurate object tracking with natural language: Algo- rithms and benchmark. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition ,...

    2021

  37. [45]

    Mamballie: Implicit retinex-aware low light enhancement with global-then-local state space

    Jiangwei Weng, Zhiqiang Yan, Ying Tai, Jianjun Qian, Jian Yang, and Jun Li. Mamballie: Implicit retinex-aware low light enhancement with global-then-local state space. arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.16105, 2024. 3

    2024 arXiv

  38. [46]

    Siamfc++: Towards robust and accurate visual tracking with target estimation guidelines

    Yinda Xu, Zeyu Wang, Zuoxin Li, Ye Yuan, and Gang Yu. Siamfc++: Towards robust and accurate visual tracking with target estimation guidelines. InProceedings of the AAAI con- ference on artificial intelligence, pages 12549–12556, 2020. 2

    2020

  39. [47]

    Learning dynamic mem- ory networks for object tracking

    Tianyu Yang and Antoni B Chan. Learning dynamic mem- ory networks for object tracking. In Proceedings of the Eu- ropean conference on computer vision (ECCV) , pages 152– 167, 2018. 2

    2018

  40. [48]

    Grounding-tracking-integration

    Zhengyuan Yang, Tushar Kumar, Tianlang Chen, Jingsong Su, and Jiebo Luo. Grounding-tracking-integration. IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology, 31(9):3433–3443, 2020. 3, 7

    2020

  41. [49]

    Joint feature learning and relation modeling for tracking: A one-stream framework

    Botao Ye, Hong Chang, Bingpeng Ma, Shiguang Shan, and Xilin Chen. Joint feature learning and relation modeling for tracking: A one-stream framework. In European Conference on Computer Vision, pages 341–357. Springer, 2022. 1, 2, 6, 7

    2022

  42. [50]

    Object track- ing: A survey

    Alper Yilmaz, Omar Javed, and Mubarak Shah. Object track- ing: A survey. Acm computing surveys (CSUR), 38(4):13–es,

  43. [51]

    Vfimamba: Video frame interpolation with state space models

    Guozhen Zhang, Chunxu Liu, Yutao Cui, Xiaotong Zhao, Kai Ma, and Limin Wang. Vfimamba: Video frame interpolation with state space models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.02315, 2024. 3

    2024 arXiv

  44. [52]

    Learn to match: Automatic matching network design 10 for visual tracking

    Zhipeng Zhang, Yihao Liu, Xiao Wang, Bing Li, and Weim- ing Hu. Learn to match: Automatic matching network design 10 for visual tracking. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF interna- tional conference on computer vision , pages 13339–13348,

  45. [53]

    Joint visual grounding and tracking with natural language specifi- cation

    Li Zhou, Zikun Zhou, Kaige Mao, and Zhenyu He. Joint visual grounding and tracking with natural language specifi- cation. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on com- puter vision and pattern recognition , pages 23151–23160,

  46. [54]

    Vision mamba: Efficient visual representation learning with bidirectional state space model

    Lianghui Zhu, Bencheng Liao, Qian Zhang, Xinlong Wang, Wenyu Liu, and Xinggang Wang. Vision mamba: Efficient visual representation learning with bidirectional state space model. In Forty-first International Conference on Machine Learning, 2024. 3, 5 11 MambaVLT: Time-Evolving ...

    2024

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.