Two-Stream Action Recognition in Ice Hockey using Player Pose Sequences and Optical Flows
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Current action recognition algorithms in ice hockey do not fully exploit the temporal cues available in video. To solve this challenge, we introduce a two-stream network utilizing player pose sequences and optical flow features for recognizing hockey actions. Player pose sequences are compact representations consisting of frame by frame human and stick joint locations and angles between joints. The optical flow features are obtained by a state-of-the-art optical flow algorithm. The player pose sequences are processed by a two-layered Long short-term memory (LSTM) network. The LSTM output is fused with optical flow features processed by a convolutional neural network (CNN). Experimental results demonstrate the efficacy of the method by achieving 90.48% test accuracy on the HARPET (Hockey Action Recognition Pose Estimation, Temporal) dataset thus surpassing current benchmark by 5%. The network performs better than the current benchmark in segregating similar classes like passing and shooting. It achieves a 90% reduction in parameters and 80% reduction in floating point operations per second (FLOPs) than the benchmark on the HARPET dataset, thus furthering the effectiveness of the network.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".