Action Concept Grounding Network for Semantically-Consistent Video Generation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent works in self-supervised video prediction have mainly focused on passive forecasting and low-level action-conditional prediction, which sidesteps the problem of semantic learning. We introduce the task of semantic action-conditional video prediction, which can be regarded as an inverse problem of action recognition. The challenge of this new task primarily lies in how to effectively inform the model of semantic action information. To bridge vision and language, we utilize the idea of capsule and propose a novel video prediction model Action Concept Grounding Network (AGCN). Our method is evaluated on two newly designed synthetic datasets, CLEVR-Building-Blocks and Sapien-Kitchen, and experiments show that given different action labels, our ACGN can correctly condition on instructions and generate corresponding future frames without need of bounding boxes. We further demonstrate our trained model can make out-of-distribution predictions for concurrent actions, be quickly adapted to new object categories and exploit its learnt features for object detection. Additional visualizations can be found at https://iclr-acgn.github.io/ACGN/.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".