MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3206818284 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2110.07082

The Impact of Spatiotemporal Augmentations on Self-Supervised Audiovisual Representation Learning

2021· preprint· en· W3206818284 on OpenAlexaff
Haider Al-Tahan, Yalda Mohsenzadeh

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMusic and Audio Processing
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceClassifier (UML)PerceptionLossy compressionBenchmark (surveying)Supervised learningRepresentation (politics)Transformation (genetics)Feature learningMachine learningArtificial neural networkPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.302
Threshold uncertainty score0.752

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.085
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.164 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicMusic and Audio ProcessingFrench-language works237,207