CodeCap-Bench: Can Code Serve as a Good Video Caption?
Abstract
Domain fit: AI-core · Core AI workload signals detected from paper context and implementation/artifact evidence.
Video captioning aims to preserve visual information through compact descriptions, predominantly using natural language. However, precisely expressing fine-grained spatial structures and temporal dynamics in natural language often leads to lengthy and potentially ambiguous descriptions. In this work, we explore Code as Video Caption, a paradigm where executable programs serve as a complementary representation of visual content through graphical primitives, layout rules, and functions of time. To examine whether code captions effectively preserve video information, we compare them with natural language captions on downstream question answering and video reconstruction tasks. Our results show that code captions achieve superior reasoning accuracy and reconstruction fidelity. Despite these advantages, realizing the potential of code captioning depends on whether current multimodal large language models (MLLMs) can generate faithful code captions. To systematically assess this capability, we introduce CodeCap-Bench, which comprises 323 videos spanning five categories of structured 2D content, along with fine-grained annotations and a multi-level evaluation framework. Extensive experiments reveal that while leading proprietary MLLMs demonstrate promising code captioning capabilities, they still struggle to faithfully capture complex temporal dynamics, with open-source models lagging substantially behind.
Results and benchmarks
Video captioning aims to preserve visual information through compact descriptions, predominantly using natural language.
Benchmark evidence is limited
Evidence graph: 2 refs, 1 links.
Utility signals: depth 60/100, grounding 58/100, status medium.
Implementation
No direct implementation yet
Maintained implementation evidence is not confirmed for this paper yet.
Use the implementation status and reproduction sections for the current action plan.
No verified maintained repo yet
There is no verified maintained implementation yet. Use this baseline plan to decide whether to prototype now or defer.
- No direct maintained implementation was found. Use the paper PDF and citation graph to design a baseline reproduction.
- Track assumptions and missing details in an experiment log before coding.
Time to first repro: a few days
Recommendation evidence is currently too limited for a maintained-repo choice. Use Implementation Status and Reproduction Path for a practical baseline plan.
- Estimate is based on paper-only reproduction flow
Reproduction readiness
No repo
No verified implementation available
- No maintained repository has been identified for this paper. Check adjacent implementations or HF artifacts below.
Hardware requirements
- Expect multi-day setup/compute for meaningful reproduction based on current guidance.
Validation caveat
Repositories and ecosystem
No additional verified repositories beyond the primary recommendation.
These repositories had low-confidence matching signals and are hidden by default.
- eerstar/LLM-Agent-paper-daily
Confidence: Low · 0 stars
Hugging Face artifacts
No trustworthy direct or curated related Hugging Face artifacts were found yet. Use targeted searches to quickly locate candidate models, datasets, and demos.
Datasets
Tip: start with models, then check datasets and spaces if you need evaluation data or demos.
Research context
Tasks
None detected
Methods
Transformer
Domains
Computer vision, Natural Language Processing
Open this paper in HFEPX to review benchmark signals, evaluation modes, and human-feedback protocol context.
Open in HFEPXJump to Paper2Code search queries derived from this paper's research context.