MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2544353392 · doi:10.1109/ichr.2007.4813905

Task-driven moving object detection for robots using visual attention

2007· article· en· W2544353392 on OpenAlexaff
Yuanlong Yu, George K. I. Mann, Raymond G. Gosine

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVisual Attention and Saliency Detection
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceComputer visionComputer scienceObject (grammar)Object detectionProbabilistic logicMotion (physics)Representation (politics)Task (project management)SegmentationInferenceRobotEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Detection of task-specific moving objects from a sequence of images obtained by a camera attached to a moving robot is a complex task. This is mainly due to background motion in the video. This paper proposes a probabilistic object-based motion attention model for this purpose. This model is composed of four components: pre-attentive object-based segmentation, bottom-up motion attention, object-based top-down biasing, and contour based object representation. The object-based attentional competition is implemented by combination of bottom-up saliency and top-down bias maps. The probabilistic distribution of attention is obtained by using Bayesian inference so as to allow uncertainties to be present. The proposed method can directly stand out moving objects of interest, thus the necessity of background motion estimation is eliminated. Experimental results in natural scenes have shown to validate this method even in case of occlusion.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.296 · 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

Citations4
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicVisual Attention and Saliency DetectionFrench-language works237,207