From Actemes to Action: A Strongly-Supervised Representation for Detailed Action Understanding
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
This paper presents a novel approach for analyzing human actions in non-scripted, unconstrained video settings based on volumetric, x-y-t, patch classifiers, termed actemes. Unlike previous action-related work, the discovery of patch classifiers is posed as a strongly-supervised process. Specifically, key point labels (e.g., position) across space time are used in a data-driven training process to discover patches that are highly clustered in the space time key point configuration space. To support this process, a new human action dataset consisting of challenging consumer videos is introduced, where notably the action label, the 2D position of a set of key points and their visibilities are provided for each video frame. On a novel input video, each acteme is used in a sliding volume scheme to yield a set of sparse, non-overlapping detections. These detections provide the intermediate substrate for segmenting out the action. For action classification, the proposed representation shows significant improvement over state-of-the-art low-level features, while providing spatiotemporal localization as additional output, which sheds further light into detailed action understanding.
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 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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