MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2537480791 · doi:10.1109/iccv.2009.5459259

Image sequence geolocation with human travel priors

2009· article· en· W2537480791 on OpenAlexafffund
Evangelos Kalogerakis, Olga Vesselova, James Hays, Alexei A. Efros, Aaron Hertzmann

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Image and Video Retrieval Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institute for Advanced ResearchMicrosoft ResearchNational Science Foundation
KeywordsGeolocationComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceSequence (biology)Prior probabilityComputer visionImage (mathematics)Matching (statistics)Interval (graph theory)Pattern recognition (psychology)Bayesian probabilityMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a method for estimating geographic location for sequences of time-stamped photographs. A prior distribution over travel describes the likelihood of traveling from one location to another during a given time interval. This distribution is based on a training database of 6 million photographs from Flickr.com. An image likelihood for each location is defined by matching a test photograph against the training database. Inferring location for images in a test sequence is then performed using the Forward-Backward algorithm, and the model can be adapted to individual users as well. Using temporal constraints allows our method to geolocate images without recognizable landmarks, and images with no geographic cues whatsoever. This method achieves a substantial performance improvement over the best-available baseline, and geolocates some users' images with near-perfect accuracy.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.003

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.288 · 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

Citations148
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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