MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4298201330 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1908.06422

Scene Classification in Indoor Environments for Robots using Context\n Based Word Embeddings

2019· preprint· W4298201330 on OpenAlexaff
Bao Xin Chen, Raghavender Sahdev, Dekun Wu, Xing Zhao, Manos Papagelis, John K. Tsotsos

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2019
Typepreprint
Language
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Image and Video Retrieval Techniques
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceConvolutional neural networkScene statisticsContext (archaeology)EmbeddingField (mathematics)Task (project management)RoboticsRobotKey (lock)Computer visionDeep learningPattern recognition (psychology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Scene Classification has been addressed with numerous techniques in computer\nvision literature. However, with the increasing number of scene classes in\ndatasets in the field, it has become difficult to achieve high accuracy in the\ncontext of robotics. In this paper, we implement an approach which combines\ntraditional deep learning techniques with natural language processing methods\nto generate a word embedding based Scene Classification algorithm. We use the\nkey idea that context (objects in the scene) of an image should be\nrepresentative of the scene label meaning a group of objects could assist to\npredict the scene class. Objects present in the scene are represented by\nvectors and the images are re-classified based on the objects present in the\nscene to refine the initial classification by a Convolutional Neural Network\n(CNN). In our approach we address indoor Scene Classification task using a\nmodel trained with a reduced pre-processed version of the Places365 dataset and\nan empirical analysis is done on a real-world dataset that we built by\ncapturing image sequences using a GoPro camera. We also report results obtained\non a subset of the Places365 dataset using our approach and additionally show a\ndeployment of our approach on a robot operating in a real-world environment.\n

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.846
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.163
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.089 · 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.

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

Citations15
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicAdvanced Image and Video Retrieval TechniquesFrench-language works237,207