MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2118527252 · doi:10.1109/cvpr.2013.343

Recognize Human Activities from Partially Observed Videos

2013· article· en· W2118527252 on OpenAlexaff
Yu Cao, Daniel Paul Barrett, Andrei Barbu, N. Siddharth, Haonan Yu, Aaron Michaux, Yuewei Lin, Sven Dickinson, Jeffrey Mark Siskind, Song Wang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicHuman Pose and Action Recognition
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Science Foundation
KeywordsSubsequenceActivity recognitionComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceProbabilistic logicPattern recognition (psychology)Longest common subsequence problemCoding (social sciences)Machine learningAlgorithmMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recognizing human activities in partially observed videos is a challenging problem and has many practical applications. When the unobserved subsequence is at the end of the video, the problem is reduced to activity prediction from unfinished activity streaming, which has been studied by many researchers. However, in the general case, an unobserved subsequence may occur at any time by yielding a temporal gap in the video. In this paper, we propose a new method that can recognize human activities from partially observed videos in the general case. Specifically, we formulate the problem into a probabilistic framework: 1) dividing each activity into multiple ordered temporal segments, 2) using spatiotemporal features of the training video samples in each segment as bases and applying sparse coding (SC) to derive the activity likelihood of the test video sample at each segment, and 3) finally combining the likelihood at each segment to achieve a global posterior for the activities. We further extend the proposed method to include more bases that correspond to a mixture of segments with different temporal lengths (MSSC), which can better represent the activities with large intra-class variations. We evaluate the proposed methods (SC and MSSC) on various real videos. We also evaluate the proposed methods on two special cases: 1) activity prediction where the unobserved subsequence is at the end of the video, and 2) human activity recognition on fully observed videos. Experimental results show that the proposed methods outperform existing state-of-the-art comparison methods.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.189 · 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

Citations203
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHuman Pose and Action RecognitionFrench-language works237,207