A Probabilistic Model of Overt Visual Attention for Cognitive Robots
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Visual attention is one of the major requirements for a robot to serve as a cognitive companion for human. The robotic visual attention is mostly concerned with overt attention which accompanies head and eye movements of a robot. In this case, each movement of the camera head triggers a number of events, namely transformation of the camera and the image coordinate systems, change of content of the visual field, and partial appearance of the stimuli. All of these events contribute to the reduction in probability of meaningful identification of the next focus of attention. These events are specific to overt attention with head movement and, therefore, their effects are not addressed in the classical models of covert visual attention. This paper proposes a Bayesian model as a robot-centric solution for the overt visual attention problem. The proposed model, while taking inspiration from the primates visual attention mechanism, guides a robot to direct its camera toward behaviorally relevant and/or visually demanding stimuli. A particle filter implementation of this model addresses the challenges involved in overt attention with head movement. Experimental results demonstrate the performance of the proposed model.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it