Structure Inference Machines: Recurrent Neural Networks for Analyzing Relations in Group Activity Recognition
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
Rich semantic relations are important in a variety of visual recognition problems. As a concrete example, group activity recognition involves the interactions and relative spatial relations of a set of people in a scene. State of the art recognition methods center on deep learning approaches for training highly effective, complex classifiers for interpreting images. However, bridging the relatively low-level concepts output by these methods to interpret higher-level compositional scenes remains a challenge. Graphical models are a standard tool for this task. In this paper, we propose a method to integrate graphical models and deep neural networks into a joint framework. Instead of using a traditional inference method, we use a sequential inference modeled by a recurrent neural network. Beyond this, the appropriate structure for inference can be learned by imposing gates on edges between nodes. Empirical results on group activity recognition demonstrate the potential of this model to handle highly structured learning tasks.
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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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