CLRNet: A Cross Locality Relation Network for Crowd Counting in Videos
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this article, we propose a new cross locality relation network (CLRNet) to generate high-quality crowd density maps for crowd counting in videos. Specifically, a cross locality relation module (CLRM) is proposed to enhance feature representations by modeling local dependencies of pixels between adjacent frames with an adapted local self-attention mechanism. First, different from the existing methods which measure similarity between pixels by dot product, a new adaptive cosine similarity is advanced to measure the relationship between two positions. Second, the traditional self-attention modules usually integrate the reconstructed features with the same weights for all the positions. However, crowd movement and background changes in a video sequence are uneven in real-life applications. As a consequence, it is inappropriate to treat all the positions in reconstructed features equally. To address this issue, a scene consistency attention map (SCAM) is developed to make CLRM pay more attention to the positions with strong correlations in adjacent frames. Furthermore, CLRM is incorporated into the network in a coarse-to-fine way to further enhance the representational capability of features. Experimental results demonstrate the effectiveness of our proposed CLRNet in comparison to the state-of-the-art methods on four public video datasets. The codes are available at: https://github.com/Amelie01/CLRNet.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".