MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4221001776 · doi:10.3390/s22062091

Skeleton Graph-Neural-Network-Based Human Action Recognition: A Survey

2022· article· en· W4221001776 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueSensors · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicHuman Pose and Action Recognition
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaChina Scholarship Council
KeywordsComputer scienceHuman skeletonSkeleton (computer programming)Action recognitionArtificial intelligenceGraphArtificial neural networkPattern recognition (psychology)Machine learningTheoretical computer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Human action recognition has been applied in many fields, such as video surveillance and human computer interaction, where it helps to improve performance. Numerous reviews of the literature have been done, but rarely have these reviews concentrated on skeleton-graph-based approaches. Connecting the skeleton joints as in the physical appearance can naturally generate a graph. This paper provides an up-to-date review for readers on skeleton graph-neural-network-based human action recognition. After analyzing previous related studies, a new taxonomy for skeleton-GNN-based methods is proposed according to their designs, and their merits and demerits are analyzed. In addition, the datasets and codes are discussed. Finally, future research directions are suggested.

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.

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)0.001
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.596
Threshold uncertainty score0.753

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.076
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.210 · 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