Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We propose "Areas of Attention", a novel attention-based model for automatic image captioning. Our approach models the dependencies between image regions, caption words, and the state of an RNN language model, using three pairwise interactions. In contrast to previous attention-based approaches that associate image regions only to the RNN state, our method allows a direct association between caption words and image regions. During training these associations are inferred from image-level captions, akin to weakly-supervised object detector training. These associations help to improve captioning by localizing the corresponding regions during testing. We also propose and compare different ways of generating attention areas: CNN activation grids, object proposals, and spatial transformers nets applied in a convolutional fashion. Spatial transformers give the best results. They allow for image specific attention areas, and can be trained jointly with the rest of the network. Our attention mechanism and spatial transformer attention areas together yield state-of-the-art results on the MSCOCO dataset.o meaningful latent semantic structure in the generated captions.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it