Predicting Deep Zero-Shot Convolutional Neural Networks Using Textual Descriptions
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
One of the main challenges in Zero-Shot Learning of visual categories is gathering semantic attributes to accompany images. Recent work has shown that learning from textual descriptions, such as Wikipedia articles, avoids the problem of having to explicitly define these attributes. We present a new model that can classify unseen categories from their textual description. Specifically, we use text features to predict the output weights of both the convolutional and the fully connected layers in a deep convolutional neural network (CNN). We take advantage of the architecture of CNNs and learn features at different layers, rather than just learning an embedding space for both modalities, as is common with existing approaches. The proposed model also allows us to automatically generate a list of pseudo-attributes for each visual category consisting of words from Wikipedia articles. We train our models end-to-end using the Caltech-UCSD bird and flower datasets and evaluate both ROC and Precision-Recall curves. Our empirical results show that the proposed model significantly outperforms previous methods.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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