Summarizing videos into a target language: Methodology, architectures and evaluation
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
The aim of the work is to report the results of the Chist-Era project AMIS (Access Multilingual Information opinionS). The purpose of AMIS is to answer the following question: How to make the information in a foreign language accessible for everyone? This issue is not limited to translate a source video into a target language video since the objective is to provide only the main idea of an Arabic video in English. This objective necessitates developing research in several areas that are not, all arrived at a maturity state: Video summarization, Speech recognition, Machine translation, Audio summarization and Speech segmentation. In this article we present several possible architectures to achieve our objective, yet we focus on only one of them. The scientific locks are be presented, and we explain how to deal with them. One of the big challenges of this work is to conceive a way to evaluate objectively a system composed of several components knowing that each of them has its limits and can propagate errors through the first component. Also, a subjective evaluation procedure is proposed in which several annotators have been mobilized to test the quality of the achieved summaries.
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 | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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