MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2097089830 · doi:10.1109/cvpr.2006.297

Successive Convex Matching for Action Detection

2006· article· en· W2097089830 on OpenAlexaff
Hao Jiang, Mark S. Drew, Ze-Nian Li

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicHuman Pose and Action Recognition
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMatching (statistics)Sequence (biology)Computer scienceComputer visionArtificial intelligenceTemplate matchingRegular polygonPoint set registrationPoint (geometry)Scheme (mathematics)Pattern recognition (psychology)AlgorithmMathematicsImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We propose human action detection based on a successive convex matching scheme. Human actions are represented as sequences of postures and specific actions are detected in video by matching the time-coupled posture sequences to video frames. The template sequence to video registration is formulated as an optimal matching problem. Instead of directly solving the highly non-convex problem, our method convexifies the matching problem into linear programs and refines the matching result by successively shrinking the trust region. The proposed scheme represents the target point space with small sets of basis points and therefore allows efficient searching. This matching scheme is applied to robustly matching a sequence of coupled binary templates simultaneously in a video sequence with cluttered backgrounds.

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)0.005
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.248 · 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

Citations72
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHuman Pose and Action RecognitionFrench-language works237,207