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

Successive Convex Matching for Action Detection

2006· article· en· W2097089830 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

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.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.929
Threshold uncertainty score0.196

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 communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

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

Quick stats

Citations72
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHuman Pose and Action RecognitionFrench-language works237,207