AdaptPose: Cross-Dataset Adaptation for 3D Human Pose Estimation by Learnable Motion Generation
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
This paper addresses the problem of cross-dataset generalization of 3D human pose estimation models. Testing a pre-trained 3D pose estimator on a new dataset results in a major performance drop. Previous methods have mainly addressed this problem by improving the diversity of the training data. We argue that diversity alone is not sufficient and that the characteristics of the training data need to be adapted to those of the new dataset such as camera view-point, position, human actions, and body size. To this end, we propose AdaptPose, an end-to-end framework that generates synthetic 3D human motions from a source dataset and uses them to fine-tune a 3D pose estimator. AdaptPose follows an adversarial training scheme. From a source 3D pose the generator generates a sequence of 3D poses and a camera orientation that is used to project the generated poses to a novel view. Without any 3D labels or camera information AdaptPose successfully learns to create synthetic 3D poses from the target dataset while only being trained on 2D poses. In experiments on the Human3.6M, MPI-INF-3DHp, 3DPW, and Ski-Pose datasets our method outperforms previous work in cross-dataset evaluations by 14% and previous semi-supervised learning methods that use partial 3D annotations by 16%.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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