# UrbanGraphEmbeddings: Learning and Evaluating Spatially Grounded Multimodal Embeddings for Urban Science

Source: [UrbanGraphEmbeddings: Learning and Evaluating Spatially Grounded Multimodal Embeddings for Urban Science](<https://www.sota2.com/research/paper/698abbd9c97a0b3e3b5de23c>)

Collection index: [llms.txt](<https://www.sota2.com/research/llms.txt>)

Data updated: 2026-02-11T05:00:13.386Z

Authors: Jie Zhang, Xingtong Yu, Yuan Fang, Rudi Stouffs, Zdravko Trivic

Published: 2026-02-09T07:28:49.000Z

## Abstract

Learning transferable multimodal embeddings for urban environments is challenging because urban understanding is inherently spatial, yet existing datasets and benchmarks lack explicit alignment between street-view images and urban structure. We introduce UGData, a spatially grounded dataset that anchors street-view images to structured spatial graphs and provides graph-aligned supervision via spatial reasoning paths and spatial context captions, exposing distance, directionality, connectivity, and neighborhood context beyond image content. Building on UGData, we propose UGE, a two-stage training strategy that progressively and stably aligns images, text, and spatial structures by combining instruction-guided contrastive learning with graph-based spatial encoding. We finally introduce UGBench, a comprehensive benchmark to evaluate how spatially grounded embeddings support diverse urban understanding tasks -- including geolocation ranking, image retrieval, urban perception, and spatial grounding. We develop UGE on multiple state-of-the-art VLM backbones, including Qwen2-VL, Qwen2.5-VL, Phi-3-Vision, and LLaVA1.6-Mistral, and train fixed-dimensional spatial embeddings with LoRA tuning. UGE built upon Qwen2.5-VL-7B backbone achieves up to 44% improvement in image retrieval and 30% in geolocation ranking on training cities, and over 30% and 22% gains respectively on held-out cities, demonstrating the effectiveness of explicit spatial grounding for spatially intensive urban tasks.

## Recorded benchmark results

A research result applies to its stated dataset, split, metric and evaluation configuration. Compare like-for-like settings, preserve the metric's unit and direction, and distinguish paper-reported results from independent reproduction. The best result recorded here is not a claim of exhaustive, current global coverage.

- [Geolocation Ranking on New York](<https://www.sota2.com/research/sota/geolocation-ranking-on-new-york.md>): Geolocation Ranking; New York; Hit@5: 58.85.

- [Nearest POI Spatial Grounding on SG](<https://www.sota2.com/research/sota/nearest-poi-spatial-grounding-on-sg.md>): Nearest POI Spatial Grounding; SG; Hit@5: 70.77.

- [Nearest POI Spatial Grounding on PA](<https://www.sota2.com/research/sota/nearest-poi-spatial-grounding-on-pa.md>): Nearest POI Spatial Grounding; PA; Hit@5: 48.85.

- [Distance-Direction Spatial Grounding on NY](<https://www.sota2.com/research/sota/distance-direction-spatial-grounding-on-ny.md>): Distance-Direction Spatial Grounding; NY; Hit@5: 44.35.

- [Distance-Direction Spatial Grounding on SG](<https://www.sota2.com/research/sota/distance-direction-spatial-grounding-on-sg.md>): Distance-Direction Spatial Grounding; SG; Hit@5: 34.23.

- [Distance-Direction Spatial Grounding on BJ](<https://www.sota2.com/research/sota/distance-direction-spatial-grounding-on-bj.md>): Distance-Direction Spatial Grounding; BJ; Hit@5: 58.95.

- [Distance-Direction Spatial Grounding on PA](<https://www.sota2.com/research/sota/distance-direction-spatial-grounding-on-pa.md>): Distance-Direction Spatial Grounding; PA; Hit@5: 50.38.

- [Geolocation Ranking on Singapore SG](<https://www.sota2.com/research/sota/geolocation-ranking-on-singapore-sg.md>): Geolocation Ranking; Singapore SG; Hit@5: 64.23.

- [Geolocation Ranking on Beijing](<https://www.sota2.com/research/sota/geolocation-ranking-on-beijing.md>): Geolocation Ranking; Beijing (BJ); Hit@5: 71.92.

- [Geolocation Ranking on Paris PA](<https://www.sota2.com/research/sota/geolocation-ranking-on-paris-pa.md>): Geolocation Ranking; Paris PA; Hit@5: 65.77.

- [Image Retrieval on New York (NY)](<https://www.sota2.com/research/sota/image-retrieval-on-new-york-ny.md>): Image Retrieval; New York (NY); Hit@5: 65.43.

- [Image Retrieval on Singapore (SG)](<https://www.sota2.com/research/sota/image-retrieval-on-singapore-sg.md>): Image Retrieval; Singapore SG; Hit@5: 0.711.

- [Image Retrieval on Beijing (BJ)](<https://www.sota2.com/research/sota/image-retrieval-on-beijing-bj.md>): Image Retrieval; Beijing (BJ); Hit@5: 62.57.

- [Image Retrieval on Paris (PA)](<https://www.sota2.com/research/sota/image-retrieval-on-paris-pa.md>): Image Retrieval; Paris PA; Hit@5: 57.22.

- [Urban Perception on New York (NY)](<https://www.sota2.com/research/sota/urban-perception-on-new-york-ny.md>): Urban Perception; New York (NY); Hit@5: 41.69.

- [Urban Perception on Singapore (SG)](<https://www.sota2.com/research/sota/urban-perception-on-singapore-sg.md>): Urban Perception; Singapore SG; Hit@5: 35.35.

- [Urban Perception on Beijing (BJ)](<https://www.sota2.com/research/sota/urban-perception-on-beijing-bj.md>): Urban Perception; Beijing (BJ); Hit@5: 34.17.

- [Urban Perception on Paris (PA)](<https://www.sota2.com/research/sota/urban-perception-on-paris-pa.md>): Urban Perception; Paris PA; Hit@5: 40.59.

- [Distance Spatial Grounding on NY](<https://www.sota2.com/research/sota/distance-spatial-grounding-on-ny.md>): Distance Spatial Grounding; NY; Hit@5: 29.62.

- [Nearest POI Spatial Grounding on BJ](<https://www.sota2.com/research/sota/nearest-poi-spatial-grounding-on-bj.md>): Nearest POI Spatial Grounding; BJ; Hit@5: 75.38.

## Original sources and implementation

[Original paper](<https://arxiv.org/abs/2602.08342>)

[PDF](<https://arxiv.org/pdf/2602.08342.pdf>)
