Epic-Sounds: A Large-Scale Dataset of Actions that Sound
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
We introduce EPIC-SOUNDS, a large-scale dataset of audio annotations capturing temporal extents and class labels within the audio stream of the egocentric videos from EPIC-KITCHENS-100. We propose an annotation pipeline where annotators temporally label distinguishable audio segments and describe the action that could have caused this sound. We identify actions that can be discriminated purely from audio, through grouping free-form descriptions into classes. For actions that involve objects colliding, we collect human annotations of the materials of these objects (e.g. a glass object being placed on a wooden surface), which we verify from visual labels, discarding ambiguities. Overall, EPIC-SOUNDS includes 78.4k categorised segments of audible events and actions, distributed across 44 classes, as well as 39.2k non-categorised segments, totalling 117.6k segments spanning 100 hours of audio, capturing diverse actions that sound in home kitchens. We train and evaluate two state-of-the-art audio recognition models on our dataset, highlighting the importance of audio-only labels and the limitations of current models to recognise actions that sound.EPIC-SOUNDS and baseline source code is available from: https://epic-kitchens.github.io/epic-sounds.
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 | 0.000 | 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