Bibliographic record
Abstract
A split-transform-merge strategy has been broadly used as an architectural constraint in convolutional neural networks for visual recognition tasks. It approximates sparsely connected networks by explicitly defining multiple branches to simultaneously learn representations with different visual concepts or properties. Dependencies or interactions between these representations are typically defined by dense and local operations, however, without any adaptiveness or high-level reasoning. In this work, we propose to exploit this strategy and combine it with our Visual Concept Reasoning Networks (VCRNet) to enable reasoning between high-level visual concepts. We associate each branch with a visual concept and derive a compact concept state by selecting a few local descriptors through an attention module. These concept states are then updated by graph-based interaction and used to adaptively modulate the local descriptors. We describe our proposed model by split-transform-attend-interact-modulate-merge stages, which are implemented by opting for a highly modularized architecture. Extensive experiments on visual recognition tasks such as image classification, semantic segmentation, object detection, scene recognition, and action recognition show that our proposed model, VCRNet, consistently improves the performance by increasing the number of parameters by less than 1%.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".