STAR-Net: Action Recognition using Spatio-Temporal Activation Reprojection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While depth cameras and inertial sensors have been frequently leveraged for human action recognition, these sensing modalities are impractical in many scenarios where cost or environmental constraints prohibit their use. As such, there has been recent interest on human action recognition using low-cost, readily-available RGB cameras via deep convolutional neural networks. However, many of the deep convolutional neural networks proposed for action recognition thus far have relied heavily on learning global appearance cues directly from imaging data, resulting in highly complex network architectures that are computationally expensive and difficult to train. Motivated to circumvent the challenges associated with training complex network architectures, we introduce the concept of spatio-temporal activation reprojection (STAR). More specifically, we reproject the spatio-temporal activations generated by human pose estimation layers in space and time using a stack of 3D convolutions. Experimental results on UTD-MHAD and J-HMDB demonstrate that an end-to-end architecture based on the proposed STAR framework (which we nickname STAR-Net) is proficient in single-environment and small-scale applications. On UTD-MHAD, STAR-Net outperforms several methods using richer data modalities such as depth and inertial sensors.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.004 |
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".