MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2417002429 · doi:10.1109/wacv.2017.11

Recurrent Fully Convolutional Networks for Video Segmentation

2017· preprint· en· W2417002429 on OpenAlexaff
Sepehr Valipour, Mennatullah Siam, Martin Jägersand, Nilanjan Ray

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Image and Video Retrieval Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceSegmentationConvolutional neural networkArtificial intelligenceSliding window protocolFrame (networking)Pattern recognition (psychology)Recurrent neural networkImage segmentationScale-space segmentationWindow (computing)Computer visionArtificial neural network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Image segmentation is an important step in most visual tasks. While convolutional neural networks have shown to perform well on single image segmentation, to our knowledge, no study has been done on leveraging recurrent gated architectures for video segmentation. Accordingly, we propose and implement a novel method for online segmentation of video sequences that incorporates temporal data. The network is built from a fully convolutional network and a recurrent unit that works on a sliding window over the temporal data. We use convolutional gated recurrent unit that preserves the spatial information and reduces the parameters learned. Our method has the advantage that it can work in an online fashion instead of operating over the whole input batch of video frames. The network is tested on video segmentation benchmarks in Segtrack V2 and Davis. It proved to have 5% improvement in Segtrack and 3% improvement in Davis in F-measure over a plain fully convolutional network.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.305 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations6
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Image and Video Retrieval TechniquesFrench-language works237,207