The Impact of Spatiotemporal Augmentations on Self-Supervised Audiovisual Representation Learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Contrastive learning of auditory and visual perception has been extremely successful when investigated individually. However, there are still major questions on how we could integrate principles learned from both domains to attain effective audiovisual representations. In this paper, we present a contrastive framework to learn audiovisual representations from unlabeled videos. The type and strength of augmentations utilized during self-supervised pre-training play a crucial role for contrastive frameworks to work sufficiently. Hence, we extensively investigate composition of temporal augmentations suitable for learning audiovisual representations; we find lossy spatio-temporal transformations that do not corrupt the temporal coherency of videos are the most effective. Furthermore, we show that the effectiveness of these transformations scales with higher temporal resolution and stronger transformation intensity. Compared to self-supervised models pre-trained on only sampling-based temporal augmentation, self-supervised models pre-trained with our temporal augmentations lead to approximately 6.5% gain on linear classifier performance on AVE dataset. Lastly, we show that despite their simplicity, our proposed transformations work well across self-supervised learning frameworks (SimSiam, MoCoV3, etc), and benchmark audiovisual dataset (AVE).
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 | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".