MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2096274779 · doi:10.1109/cvpr.2008.4587559

Learning stick-figure models using nonparametric Bayesian priors over trees

2008· article· en· W2096274779 on OpenAlexaff
Edward Meeds, David A. Ross, Richard S. Zemel, Sam T. Roweis

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicHuman Pose and Action Recognition
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrior probabilityNonparametric statisticsArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceTree (set theory)InferenceBayesian inferenceBayesian probabilityPath (computing)AlgorithmProbabilistic logicMachine learningPattern recognition (psychology)MathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a probabilistic stick-figure model that uses a nonparametric Bayesian distribution over trees for its structure prior. Sticks are represented by nodes in a tree in such a way that their parameter distributions are probabilistically centered around their parent node. This prior enables the inference procedures to learn multiple explanations for motion-capture data, each of which could be trees of different depth and path lengths. Thus, the algorithm can automatically determine a reasonable distribution over the number of sticks in a given dataset and their hierarchical relationships. We provide experimental results on several motion-capture datasets, demonstrating the modelpsilas ability to recover plausible stick-figure structure, and also the modelpsilas robust behavior when faced with occlusion.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0030.003
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.219 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations19
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHuman Pose and Action RecognitionFrench-language works237,207