Sequence Level Semantics Aggregation for Video Object Detection
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
Video objection detection (VID) has been a rising research direction in recent years. A central issue of VID is the appearance degradation of video frames caused by fast motion. This problem is essentially ill-posed for a single frame. Therefore, aggregating features from other frames becomes a natural choice. Existing methods rely heavily on optical flow or recurrent neural networks for feature aggregation. However, these methods emphasize more on the temporally nearby frames. In this work, we argue that aggregating features in the full-sequence level will lead to more discriminative and robust features for video object detection. To achieve this goal, we devise a novel Sequence Level Semantics Aggregation (SELSA) module. We further demonstrate the close relationship between the proposed method and the classic spectral clustering method, providing a novel view for understanding the VID problem. We test the proposed method on the ImageNet VID and the EPIC KITCHENS dataset and achieve new state-of-the-art results. Our method does not need complicated postprocessing methods such as Seq-NMS or Tubelet rescoring, which keeps the pipeline simple and clean.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 it