Hybrid Unsupervised Scale-invariant Slide Detection (HUSSD) for Video Presentation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper addresses the task of unsupervised scale-invariant slide detection for video presentations, which aims to detect slides and index them with an appropriate location in the presentation video. We propose two new methods that improve on Scale-Invariant Feature Transform (SIFT) in terms of computational cost as well as accuracy. Both methods are instantiations of our Hybrid Unsupervised Scale-invariant Slide Detection paradigm (HUSSD). The first is a feature-based HUSSD algorithm. This method utilizes SIFT as well as Oriented FAST and rotated BRIEF (ORB) tracker to resolve the computation cost issue. Feature-based HUSSD optimizes for speed and substantially improves the runtime to approximately 30 times faster than SIFT at the trivial cost of accuracy falling from 90.06% to 82.89%. Furthermore, our second novel method for slide detection, namely template-based HUSSD, employs a multiscale matching detector and a single scale template matching tracker to improve on SIFT in terms of both speed and accuracy by 7.91 times and to 95.05% respectively.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".