MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2150986509 · doi:10.1109/wmvc.2007.8

Analysis of Irregularities in Human Actions with Volumetric Motion History Images

2007· article· en· W2150986509 on OpenAlexaff
Alexandra Branzan Albu, Trevor Beugeling, Naznin Virji‐Babul, Cheryl M. Beach

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicHuman Pose and Action Recognition
Canadian institutionsDown Syndrome Research FoundationIsland HealthUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSmoothnessComputer visionArtificial intelligenceMotion (physics)Computer scienceStandard deviationMotion analysisRepresentation (politics)Orientation (vector space)VisualizationHuman motionMeasure (data warehouse)Motion estimationMotion fieldPattern recognition (psychology)MathematicsMathematical analysisStatisticsData miningGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes a new 3D motion representation, the Volumetric Motion History Image (VMHI), to be used for the analysis of irregularities in human actions. Such irregularities may occur either in speed or orientation and are strong indicators of the balance abilities and of the confidence level of the subject performing the activity. The proposed VMHI representation overcomes limits of the standard MHI related to motion self-occlusion and speed and is therefore suitable for the visualization and quantification of abnormal motion. This work focuses on the analysis of sway, which is the most common motion irregularity in the studied set of human actions. The sway is visualized and quantified via a user interface using a measure of spatiotemporal surface smoothness, namely the deviation vector. Experimental results show that the deviation vector is a reliable measure for quantifying the deviation of abnormal motion from its corresponding normal motion.

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 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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.681
Threshold uncertainty score0.358

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations12
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHuman Pose and Action RecognitionFrench-language works237,207