Stochastic Image-to-Video Synthesis using cINNs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Video understanding calls for a model to learn the characteristic interplay between static scene content and its dynamics: Given an image, the model must be able to predict a future progression of the portrayed scene and, conversely, a video should be explained in terms of its static image content and all the remaining characteristics not present in the initial frame. This naturally suggests a bijective mapping between the video domain and the static content as well as residual information. In contrast to common stochastic image-to-video synthesis, such a model does not merely generate arbitrary videos progressing the initial image. Given this image, it rather provides a one-to-one mapping between the residual vectors and the video with stochastic outcomes when sampling. The approach is naturally implemented using a conditional invertible neural network (cINN) that can explain videos by independently modelling static and other video characteristics, thus laying the basis for controlled video synthesis. Experiments on diverse video datasets demonstrate the effectiveness of our approach in terms of both the quality and diversity of the synthesized results. Our project page is available at https://bit.ly/3dg90fV.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".