MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3204392776 · doi:10.18280/ria.350407

Feature Extraction Model with Group-Based Classifier for Content Extraction from Video Data

2021· article· en· W3204392776 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Gowrisankar Kalakoti, G. Prabakaran

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue d intelligence artificielle · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Image and Video Retrieval Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceClassifier (UML)Artificial intelligenceFeature extractionIdentifierPattern recognition (psychology)Data miningComputer vision

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In today's PC illustration, numerous object locations of videos are quite critical duties to accomplish. Swiftly and reliably recognising and distinguishing the multiple aspects of a video is a crucial attribute for collaborating with one's condition (object). The core issue is that in theory, to ensure that no significant aspect is missing; all aspects of a content in a video must be scanned for elements on various different scales. It requires some investment and effort anyway, to really arrange the substance of a given content region and both time and computational limits that an operator can spend on classification are constrained. Two presumption procedures for accelerating the standard identifier are performed by the proposed method and demonstrate their capability by performing both identification efficiency and velocity. The main enhancement of our group-based classifier focuses on accelerating the grouping of sub features by planning the problem as a selection procedure for consecutive features. The subsequent improvement gives better multiscale features to distinguish objects of all sizes without rescaling the information image from a video. Extracting contents from video is an assortment of successive images with a steady time interim. So video can give more data about contents in it when situations are changing regarding time. Along these lines, physically taking care of contents with features are very unimaginable. In the proposed work, it is suggested that a Group-based Video Content Extraction Classifier (GbCCE) extracts content from a video by extracting relevant features using a group-based classifier. The proposed method is distinct from conventional approaches and the findings indicate that better output is demonstrated by the proposed method.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.542
Threshold uncertainty score0.830

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.157
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.191 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue d intelligence artificielleSame topicAdvanced Image and Video Retrieval TechniquesFrench-language works237,207