Bibliographic record
Abstract
Face recognition, face measurement, camera control, measurement of expressions and other tasks can benefit from online visual multi-face tracking. Given the availability of high quality general purpose detectors and tracking-by-detection frameworks, we provide guidance on how to develop a multi-face tracker out of standard components. In this paper, we train common object detectors specifically on faces to understand how well these detectors perform and evaluate different classifier loss functions. Our specific case study tracks faces in the context of council meetings and in parliamentary settings such as the Canadian House of Commons for which we create an annotated video set as a benchmark (see Fig. 1). These meetings in a parliamentary setting are often recorded from multiple cameras with participants and audiences walking around. Fast camera switching and zooming lead to significant scale changes of faces. Therefore, these settings can be characterized as tracking in unconstrained video. This will negatively impact the tracking accuracy and increase the likelihood of identity switches (IDS) between face labels. However, being able to track in unconstrained video enables a wider range of measurement applications. We find that while online tracking based on combining state-of-the-art methods can lead to high-quality tracking results, there is still a large gap between offline and online methods. The discussed method can be adapted to other tracking tasks for which large image databases are available.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.003 |
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".