MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3183877130 · doi:10.1109/wacv51458.2022.00403

Detail Preserving Residual Feature Pyramid Modules for Optical Flow

2022· article· en· W3183877130 on OpenAlexaff
Libo Long, Jochen Lang

Bibliographic record

Venue2022 IEEE/CVF Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision (WACV) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Vision and Imaging
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUpsamplingPyramid (geometry)Feature (linguistics)Computer scienceResidualModular designArtificial intelligenceOptical flowFeature extractionIterative methodFlow (mathematics)Computer visionPattern recognition (psychology)AlgorithmImage (mathematics)Mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Feature pyramids and iterative refinement have recently led to great progress in optical flow estimation. However, downsampling in feature pyramids can cause blending of foreground objects with the background, which will mislead subsequent decisions in the iterative processing. The results are missing details especially in the flow of thin and of small structures. We propose a novel Residual Feature Pyramid Module (RFPM) which retains important details in the feature map without changing the overall iterative refinement design of the optical flow estimation. RFPM incorporates a residual structure between multiple feature pyramids into a downsampling module that corrects the blending of objects across boundaries. We demonstrate how to integrate our module with two state-of-the-art iterative refinement architectures. Results show that our RFPM visibly reduces flow errors and improves state-of-art performance in the clean pass of Sintel, and is one of the top-performing methods in KITTI. According to the particular modular structure of RFPM, we introduce a special fine-tuning approach that can dramatically decrease the training time compared to a typical full optical flow training schedule on multiple datasets.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.278 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2022 IEEE/CVF Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision (WACV)Same topicAdvanced Vision and ImagingFrench-language works237,207