OptiFlex: Multi-Frame Animal Pose Estimation Combining Deep Learning With Optical Flow
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Animal pose estimation tools based on deep learning have greatly improved animal behaviour quantification. These tools perform pose estimation on individual video frames, but do not account for variability of animal body shape in their prediction and evaluation. Here, we introduce a novel multi-frame animal pose estimation framework, referred to as OptiFlex. This framework integrates a flexible base model (i.e., FlexibleBaseline), which accounts for variability in animal body shape, with an OpticalFlow model that incorporates temporal context from nearby video frames. Pose estimation can be optimised using multi-view information to leverage all four dimensions (3D space and time). We evaluate FlexibleBaseline using datasets of four different lab animal species (mouse, fruit fly, zebrafish, and monkey) and introduce an intuitive evaluation metric-adjusted percentage of correct key points (aPCK). Our analyses show that OptiFlex provides prediction accuracy that outperforms current deep learning based tools, highlighting its potential for studying a wide range of behaviours across different animal species.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it