Search arXiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2501.09355

YETI (YET to Intervene) Proactive Interventions by Multimodal AI Agents in Augmented Reality Tasks

Saptarashmi Bandyopadhyay·Vikas Bahirwani·Lavisha Aggarwal·Bhanu Guda·Lin Li·Andrea Colaco
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Multimodal AI Agents are AI models that have the capability of interactively and cooperatively assisting human users to solve day-to-day tasks. Augmented Reality (AR) head worn devices can uniquely improve the user experience of solving procedural day-to-day tasks by providing egocentric multimodal (audio and video) observational capabilities to AI Agents. Such AR capabilities can help AI Agents see and listen to actions that users take which can relate to multimodal capabilities of human users. Existing AI Agents, either Large Language Models (LLMs) or Multimodal Vision-Language Models (VLMs) are reactive in nature, which means that models cannot take an action without reading or listening to the human user's prompts. Proactivity of AI Agents on the other hand can help the human user detect and correct any mistakes in agent observed tasks, encourage users when they do tasks correctly or simply engage in conversation with the user - akin to a human teaching or assisting a user. Our proposed YET to Intervene (YETI) multimodal agent focuses on the research question of identifying circumstances that may require the agent to intervene proactively. This allows the agent to understand when it can intervene in a conversation with human users that can help the user correct mistakes on tasks, like cooking, using AR. Our YETI Agent learns scene understanding signals based on interpretable notions of Structural Similarity (SSIM) on consecutive video frames. We also define the alignment signal which the AI Agent can learn to identify if the video frames corresponding to the user's actions on the task are consistent with expected actions. These signals are used by our AI Agent to determine when it should proactively intervene. We compare our results on the instances of proactive intervention in the HoloAssist multimodal benchmark for an expert agent guiding a user to complete procedural tasks.

Explore related subjects

cs.AIcs.CVcs.ETcs.MA

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Saptarashmi Bandyopadhyay, Vikas Bahirwani, Lavisha Aggarwal, Bhanu Guda, Lin Li, Andrea Colaco. 2025-01-16. YETI (YET to Intervene) Proactive Interventions by Multimodal AI Agents in Augmented Reality Tasks. https://arxiv.org/abs/2501.09355

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Decoupling Readiness from Release for Tail-Aware Scheduling of Agentic LLM Workflows

Agentic LLM workflows consist of sequences of model turns interleaved with tool interactions, so their end-to-end completion time depends not only on inference speed but also on when ready turns are released. Most runtimes release each turn immediately upon readiness. Under contention, this eager release policy can accumulate released but unfinished work; once submitted, those turns can no longer be reordered by the workflow-level policy, increasing tail latency. We present a tail-risk-aware turn release scheduling method that jointly decides which ready turn to release next and how much released but unfinished work to maintain. The method uses a mean--Conditional Value-at-Risk (CVaR) objective to capture the evolving tail risk of unfinished workflows, incorporates online estimates of turn work when prioritizing ready turns, and adapts the released work budget to observed queue pressure. We evaluate the method using real agent execution traces from software engineering tasks across multiple LLMs and workflow arrival rates. The method performs comparably to eager release under light load and substantially reduces the P95 of workflow flow time under contention, achieving up to a \(3.50\times\) speedup.

cs.AI↗
arXiv2026

Demystifying the Privacy-Utility Trade-off in LLM Interactions

The integration of Large Language Models into daily tasks relies on context-rich instructions, inevitably exposing sensitive user information. Current privacy-preserving methods typically employ context-agnostic static rules, causing severe utility degradation. However, the specific mechanisms governing how sanitization impacts downstream performance remain largely underexplored. To address this, we conduct a systematic analysis to deconstruct the privacy-utility trade-off, uncovering three underlying mechanisms: (1) Context-Dependent Utility, which first establishes when to sanitize by revealing that data value shifts from critical constraints to dispensable noise based on user intent; (2) Strategic Adaptation, which subsequently determines how to sanitize by dictating that the choice between removal and replacement depends on the task's reliance on factual integrity versus structural coherence; and (3) Combinatorial Interplay, which finally extends the protection scope by demonstrating that attributes form a semantic web of synergistic dependencies or antagonistic redundancies. Guided by these insights, we introduce an intent-driven local protection framework. By distilling a lightweight model Veilmind-4B to drive a dynamic extraction-sanitization-restoration pipeline, our approach reaches a low-leakage privacy point while preserving substantially higher response utility than existing privacy-oriented baselines, advancing the privacy-utility trade-off toward the Pareto frontier.

cs.AI↗
arXiv2026

Defining AI Agents: A Compendium of Criteria, Metrics, and Benchmarks

The term agent in artificial intelligence lacks a standard definition, complicating the evaluation, comparison, and reproducibility of AI agent research. We address this ambiguity through a survey organized around five dimensions of agenticness: environmental interaction, learning and adaptation, autonomy, goal-directed behavior, and temporal coherence. For each dimension, we examine how the underlying capability has been conceptualized across prior work and synthesize the metrics, benchmarks, and evaluation frameworks used to assess it. This review provides a structured account of the current landscape of agent evaluation, highlighting both established approaches and areas where evaluation remains limited or inconsistent. We additionally introduce the Agent Compendium, a public-facing digital resource that organizes and extends the evaluation methods identified through this review. Together, the survey and compendium provide a common structure for evaluating and comparing agent capabilities across AI systems, supporting more reproducible research, clearer communication, and more systematic study of artificial agents.

cs.AI↗