MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2604117447 · doi:10.1109/iccv.2017.403

Temporal Non-volume Preserving Approach to Facial Age-Progression and Age-Invariant Face Recognition

2017· article· en· W2604117447 on OpenAlexaff
Chi Nhan Duong, Kha Gia Quach, Khoa Luu, Ngan Le, Marios Savvides

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicFace recognition and analysis
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceLandmarkArtificial intelligenceProbabilistic logicGenerative modelFace (sociological concept)Invariant (physics)EmbeddingGenerative grammarInferencePattern recognition (psychology)Deep learningAlgorithmMachine learningMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Modeling the long-term facial aging process is extremely challenging due to the presence of large and non-linear variations during the face development stages. In order to efficiently address the problem, this work first decomposes the aging process into multiple short-term stages. Then, a novel generative probabilistic model, named Temporal Non-Volume Preserving (TNVP) transformation, is presented to model the facial aging process at each stage. Unlike Generative Adversarial Networks (GANs), which requires an empirical balance threshold, and Restricted Boltzmann Machines (RBM), an intractable model, our proposed TNVP approach guarantees a tractable density function, exact inference and evaluation for embedding the feature transformations between faces in consecutive stages. Our model shows its advantages not only in capturing the non-linear age related variance in each stage but also producing a smooth synthesis in age progression across faces. Our approach can model any face in the wild provided with only four basic landmark points. Moreover, the structure can be transformed into a deep convolutional network while keeping the advantages of probabilistic models with tractable log-likelihood density estimation. Our method is evaluated in both terms of synthesizing age-progressed faces and cross-age face verification and consistently shows the state-of-the-art results in various face aging databases, i.e. FG-NET, MORPH, AginG Faces in the Wild (AGFW), and Cross-Age Celebrity Dataset (CACD). A large-scale face verification on Megaface challenge 1 is also performed to further show the advantages of our proposed approach.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Citations98
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFace recognition and analysisFrench-language works237,207