MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2997514790 · doi:10.1609/aaai.v34i07.6783

Deep Generative Probabilistic Graph Neural Networks for Scene Graph Generation

2020· article· en· W2997514790 on OpenAlexaff
Mahmoud Khademi, Oliver Schulte

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMultimodal Machine Learning Applications
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceScene graphProbabilistic logicGenerative modelGraphTheoretical computer scienceMinimum bounding boxPattern recognition (psychology)Generative grammarImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We propose a new algorithm, called Deep Generative Probabilistic Graph Neural Networks (DG-PGNN), to generate a scene graph for an image. The input to DG-PGNN is an image, together with a set of region-grounded captions and object bounding-box proposals for the image. To generate the scene graph, DG-PGNN constructs and updates a new model, called a Probabilistic Graph Network (PGN). A PGN can be thought of as a scene graph with uncertainty: it represents each node and each edge by a CNN feature vector and defines a probability mass function (PMF) for node-type (object category) of each node and edge-type (predicate class) of each edge. The DG-PGNN sequentially adds a new node to the current PGN by learning the optimal ordering in a Deep Q-learning framework, where states are partial PGNs, actions choose a new node, and rewards are defined based on the ground-truth. After adding a node, DG-PGNN uses message passing to update the feature vectors of the current PGN by leveraging contextual relationship information, object co-occurrences, and language priors from captions. The updated features are then used to fine-tune the PMFs. Our experiments show that the proposed algorithm significantly outperforms the state-of-the-art results on the Visual Genome dataset for scene graph generation. We also show that the scene graphs constructed by DG-PGNN improve performance on the visual question answering task, for questions that need reasoning about objects and their interactions in the scene context.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.097
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.211 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations57
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial IntelligenceSame topicMultimodal Machine Learning ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207