MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312523916 · doi:10.1109/cvpr52688.2022.01509

Multi-Modal Dynamic Graph Transformer for Visual Grounding

2022· article· en· W4312523916 on OpenAlexaff
Sijia Chen, Baochun Li

Bibliographic record

Venue2022 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMultimodal Machine Learning Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceInitializationTransformerGroundModalGraphGround truthArtificial intelligenceData miningPattern recognition (psychology)Theoretical computer scienceVoltage

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Visual grounding (VG) aims to align the correct regions of an image with a natural language query about that image. We found that existing VG methods are trapped by the single-stage grounding process that performs a sole evaluate-and-rank for meticulously prepared regions. Their performance depends on the density and quality of the candidate regions, and is capped by the inability to optimize the located regions continuously. To address these issues, we propose to remodel VG into a progressively optimized visual semantic alignment process. Our proposed multi-modal dynamic graph transformer (M-DGT) achieves this by building upon the dynamic graph structure with regions as nodes and their semantic relations as edges. Starting from a few randomly initialized regions, M-DGT is able to make sustainable adjustments (i.e., 2D spatial transformation and deletion) to the nodes and edges of the graph based on multi-modal information and the graph feature, thereby efficiently shrinking the graph to approach the ground truth regions. Experiments show that with an average of 48 boxes as initialization, the performance of M-DGT on the Flickr30k Entities and RefCOCO datasets outperforms existing state-of-the-art methods by a substantial margin, in terms of both accuracy and Intersect over Union (IOU) scores. Furthermore, introducing M-DGT to optimize the predicted regions of existing methods can further significantly improve their performance. The source codes are available at https://github.com/iQua/M-DGT.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.003

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.287 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations27
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2022 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR)Same topicMultimodal Machine Learning ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207