MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2070869270 · doi:10.1109/icsc.2013.72

A Customizable Time Warping Method for Motion Alignment

2013· article· en· W2070869270 on OpenAlexaff
S. Ali Etemad, Ali Arya

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHuman Motion and Animation
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDynamic time warpingComputer scienceImage warpingProcess (computing)Artificial intelligenceMotion (physics)Computer visionPersonalizationSimple (philosophy)AlgorithmPattern recognition (psychology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents Correlation-optimized Time Warping (CoTW) for aligning motion sequences. The proposed method maximizes an objective function based on the correlation of the two sequences. There are several parameters involved in the process, which can be computationally optimized or manually customized. Customization can take place based on the number and/or nature of actions in the sequences. CoTW shows robust performance for aligning simple gait sequences as well as sequences containing several different actions.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.862
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.230
Teacher spread0.220 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations5
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHuman Motion and AnimationFrench-language works237,207