Consistency driven Sequential Transformers Attention Model for Partially Observable Scenes
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Most hard attention models initially observe a complete scene to locate and sense informative glimpses, and predict class-label of a scene based on glimpses. However, in many applications (e.g., aerial imaging), observing an entire scene is not always feasible due to the limited time and resources available for acquisition. In this paper, we develop a Sequential Transformers Attention Model (STAM) that only partially observes a complete image and predicts informative glimpse locations solely based on past glimpses. We design our agent using DeiT-distilled [44] and train it with a one-step actorcritic algorithm. Furthermore, to improve classification performance, we introduce a novel training objective, which enforces consistency between the class distribution predicted by a teacher model from a complete image and the class distribution predicted by our agent using glimpses. When the agent senses only 4% of the total image area, the inclusion of the proposed consistency loss in our training objective yields 3% and 8% higher accuracy on ImageNet and fMoW datasets, respectively. Moreover, our agent outperforms previous state-of-the-art by observing nearly 27% and 42% fewer pixels in glimpses on ImageNet and fMoW.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it