Discriminative Latent Models for Recognizing Contextual Group Activities
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we go beyond recognizing the actions of individuals and focus on group activities. This is motivated from the observation that human actions are rarely performed in isolation; the contextual information of what other people in the scene are doing provides a useful cue for understanding high-level activities. We propose a novel framework for recognizing group activities which jointly captures the group activity, the individual person actions, and the interactions among them. Two types of contextual information, group-person interaction and person-person interaction, are explored in a latent variable framework. In particular, we propose three different approaches to model the person-person interaction. One approach is to explore the structures of person-person interaction. Differently from most of the previous latent structured models, which assume a predefined structure for the hidden layer, e.g., a tree structure, we treat the structure of the hidden layer as a latent variable and implicitly infer it during learning and inference. The second approach explores person-person interaction in the feature level. We introduce a new feature representation called the action context (AC) descriptor. The AC descriptor encodes information about not only the action of an individual person in the video, but also the behavior of other people nearby. The third approach combines the above two. Our experimental results demonstrate the benefit of using contextual information for disambiguating group activities.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it