Automatic labeling of the Training Dataset for Individual and Group Activities Detection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Real-time activity detection is one of the interesting fields of research due to its wide range of applications in human-computer interaction, health monitoring, security, workers' performance monitoring, safety, etc. Computer vision and deep learning is one of the most popular solutions to detect human activities. However, these solutions often suffer from inadequate training datasets in terms of quantity and quality. Additionally, the procedure of data labeling is time-consuming and expensive. This paper proposes an automated method for labeling data for automatic individual and group activity detection. The proposed algorithm takes advantage of combining simple object classes (such as hands, and persons) and spatial relationship rules to label the training dataset for detecting activities like covering coughs with an arm or hand, hugging, and hand-shaking. These activities were used for Covid risky activities monitoring at workplaces. To implement this algorithm, we used You Only Look Once (YOLO) and Mask Reginal Convolutional Neural Network (Mask-RCNN) object detection and we applied the transfer learning from the Common Object in Context (COCO) CNN model. The results showed 96% precision of data labeling for covering coughs with a hand, 93% for covering coughs with an arm, 89% for hugging, and 87% for handshaking activities. This is while, the average precision of activity detection using automatically annotated data, only decreased by 3% for Mask RCNN and 5% for YOLO. Also, the separation of the individual and group activity classes led to more detection precision. In conclusion, the proposed automatic data labeling algorithm preserved the quality of data annotation while outperforming the training-data annotation speed.
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) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
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.
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".