Robust joint audio-video localization in video conferencing using reliability information II: Bayesian network fusion
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 study builds on our previous IMTC03 paper (D. Lo. R. Goubran et al, Proc. 20th IEEE Instrument. and Meas., vol.2. p.1414-1418, 2003). Both this study and our previous paper use data fusion to combine results from multiple audio and video localizers. The two studies differ in the type of data fusion engine used. The former study explored the use of a summing voter, whereas this current study employs the use of a Bayesian network. The novelty of both papers is the use of reliability estimates to improve the overall localization performance and robustness. Reliability estimates, that are derived based on known physical properties of each individual localizer, were introduced into the fusion engines to achieve better performance. Although the summing voter fusion engine used in the last paper improves the overall localization performance, it does not take into account the unique characteristics of each localizer. The Bayesian network allows these characteristics to be included as part of the fusion process. In this study, we investigate the impact of (1) using a Bayesian network as the data fusion engine, and (2) adding reliability estimates into the fusion engine.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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