MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3077098836 · doi:10.3390/s20174673

Energy-Guided Temporal Segmentation Network for Multimodal Human Action Recognition

2020· article· en· W3077098836 on OpenAlexaff
Qiang Liu, Enqing Chen, Lei Gao, Chengwu Liang, Hao Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueSensors · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicHuman Pose and Action Recognition
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China-Henan Joint FundNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaNanyang Technological University
KeywordsComputer scienceSegmentationArtificial intelligenceConvolutional neural networkConstruct (python library)Pattern recognition (psychology)Task (project management)Energy (signal processing)Action recognitionAction (physics)Machine learningFrame (networking)Class (philosophy)Mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To achieve the satisfactory performance of human action recognition, a central task is to address the sub-action sharing problem, especially in similar action classes. Nevertheless, most existing convolutional neural network (CNN)-based action recognition algorithms uniformly divide video into frames and then randomly select the frames as inputs, ignoring the distinct characteristics among different frames. In recent years, depth videos have been increasingly used for action recognition, but most methods merely focus on the spatial information of the different actions without utilizing temporal information. In order to address these issues, a novel energy-guided temporal segmentation method is proposed here, and a multimodal fusion strategy is employed with the proposed segmentation method to construct an energy-guided temporal segmentation network (EGTSN). Specifically, the EGTSN had two parts: energy-guided video segmentation and a multimodal fusion heterogeneous CNN. The proposed solution was evaluated on a public large-scale NTU RGB+D dataset. Comparisons with state-of-the-art methods demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed 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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.807
Threshold uncertainty score0.539

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.095
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
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

Citations4
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSensorsSame topicHuman Pose and Action RecognitionFrench-language works237,207