Recovering 3D human body configurations using shape contexts
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
The problem we consider in this paper is to take a single two-dimensional image containing a human figure, locate the joint positions, and use these to estimate the body configuration and pose in three-dimensional space. The basic approach is to store a number of exemplar 2D views of the human body in a variety of different configurations and viewpoints with respect to the camera. On each of these stored views, the locations of the body joints (left elbow, right knee, etc.) are manually marked and labeled for future use. The input image is then matched to each stored view, using the technique of shape context matching in conjunction with a kinematic chain-based deformation model. Assuming that there is a stored view sufficiently similar in configuration and pose, the correspondence process will succeed. The locations of the body joints are then transferred from the exemplar view to the test shape. Given the 2D joint locations, the 3D body configuration and pose are then estimated using an existing algorithm. We can apply this technique to video by treating each frame independently--tracking just becomes repeated recognition. We present results on a variety of data sets.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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