MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2067440131 · doi:10.1109/tip.2009.2026677

Video Condensation by Ribbon Carving

2009· article· en· W2067440131 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Zhuang Li, Prakash Ishwar, Janusz Konrad

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Image Processing · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Vision and Imaging
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Ottawa
KeywordsComputer scienceAutomatic summarizationContext (archaeology)Video trackingComputer visionVideo processingCompositingVideo compression picture typesArtificial intelligenceCarvingUncompressed videoAnachronismVideo post-processingImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Efficient browsing of long video sequences is a key tool in visual surveillance, e.g., for postevent video forensics, but can also be used for fast review of motion pictures and home videos. While frame skipping (fixed or adaptive) is straightforward to implement, its performance is quite limited. Although more efficient techniques have been developed, such as video summarization and video montage, they lose either the temporal or semantic context of events. A recently proposed method called video synopsis deals with some of these issues but involves multiple processing stages and is fairly complex. Video condensation, that we propose here, is novel in the way information is removed from the space-time video volume, is conceptually simple and relatively easy to implement. We introduce the concept of a video ribbon inspired by that of a seam recently proposed for image resizing. We recursively carve ribbons out by minimizing an activity-aware cost function using dynamic programming. The ribbon model we develop is flexible and permits an easy adjustment of the compromise between temporal condensation ratio and anachronism of events. We also propose sliding-window ribbon carving to handle streaming video and demonstrate the method's efficiency on motor and pedestrian traffic data.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.266 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations63
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Image ProcessingSame topicAdvanced Vision and ImagingFrench-language works237,207