Self-Supervised Relation Alignment for Scene Graph 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
The goal of scene graph generation is to predict a graph from an input image, where nodes correspond to identified and localized objects and edges to their corresponding interaction predicates. Existing methods are trained in a fully supervised manner and focus on message passing mechanisms, loss functions, and/or bias mitigation. In this work we introduce a simple-yet-effective self-supervised relational alignment regularization designed to improve the scene graph generation performance. The proposed alignment is general and can be combined with any existing scene graph generation framework, where it is trained alongside the original model's objective. The alignment is achieved through distillation, where an auxiliary relation prediction branch, that mirrors and shares parameters with the supervised counterpart, is designed. In the auxiliary branch, relational input features are partially masked prior to message passing and predicate prediction. The predictions for masked relations are then aligned with the supervised counterparts after the message passing. We illustrate the effectiveness of this self-supervised relational alignment in conjunction with two scene graph generation architectures, SGTR and Neural Motifs, and show that in both cases we achieve significantly improved performance.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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