MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2111407473 · doi:10.1109/crv.2012.37

Learning Categorical Shape from Captioned Images

2012· article· en· W2111407473 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
TopicMultimodal Machine Learning Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceMinimum bounding boxObject (grammar)Bounding overwatchComputer visionBoundary (topology)Active appearance modelAnnotationSet (abstract data type)Categorical variablePattern recognition (psychology)Image (mathematics)Class (philosophy)Cognitive neuroscience of visual object recognitionMathematicsMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Given a set of captioned images of cluttered scenes containing various objects in different positions and scales, we learn named contour models of object categories without relying on bounding box annotation. We extend a recent language-vision integration framework that finds spatial configurations of image features that co-occur with words in image captions. By substituting appearance features with local contour features, object categories are recognized by a contour model that grows along the object's boundary. Experiments on ETHZ are presented to show that 1) the extended framework is better able to learn named visual categories whose within-class variation is better captured by a shape model than an appearance model, and 2) typical object recognition methods fail when manually annotated bounding boxes are unavailable.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.688
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)0.0000.002

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.254 · 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

Citations2
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMultimodal Machine Learning ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207