k-SDPP: Fixed-Size Video Summarization via Sequential Determinantal Point Processes
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
With the explosive growth of video data, video summarization which converts long-time videos to key frame sequences has become an important task in information retrieval and machine learning. Determinantal point processes (DPPs) which are elegant probabilistic models have been successfully applied to video summarization. However, existing DPP-based video summarization methods suffer from poor efficiency of outputting a specified size summary or neglecting inherent sequential nature of videos. In this paper, we propose a new model in the DPP lineage named k-SDPP in vein of sequential determinantal point processes but with fixed user specified size k. Our k-SDPP partitions sampled frames of a video into segments where each segment is with constant number of video frames. Moreover, an efficient branch and bound method (BB) considering sequential nature of the frames is provided to optimally select k frames delegating the summary from the divided segments. Experimental results show that our proposed BB method outperforms not only k-DPP and sequential DPP (seqDPP) but also the partition and Markovian assumption based 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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