A Sampling Approach to Generating Closely Interacting 3D Pose-Pairs from 2D Annotations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We introduce a data-driven method to generate a large number of plausible, closely interacting 3D human pose-pairs, for a given motion category, e.g., wrestling or salsa dance. With much difficulty in acquiring close interactions using 3D sensors, our approach utilizes abundant existing video data which cover many human activities. Instead of treating the data generation problem as one of reconstruction, either through 3D acquisition or direct 2D-to-3D data lifting from video annotations, we present a solution based on Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) sampling. Given a motion category and a set of video frames depicting the motion with the 2D pose-pair in each frame annotated, we start the sampling with one or few seed 3D pose-pairs which are manually created based on the target motion category. The initial set is then augmented by MCMC sampling around the seeds, via the Metropolis-Hastings algorithm and guided by a probability density function (PDF) that is defined by two terms to bias the sampling towards 3D pose-pairs that are physically valid and plausible for the motion category. With a focus on efficient sampling over the space of close interactions, rather than pose spaces, we develop a novel representation called interaction coordinates (IC) to encode both poses and their interactions in an integrated manner. Plausibility of a 3D pose-pair is then defined based on the IC and with respect to the annotated 2D pose-pairs from video. We show that our sampling-based approach is able to efficiently synthesize a large volume of plausible, closely interacting 3D pose-pairs which provide a good coverage of the input 2D pose-pairs.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".