MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4379522978 · doi:10.21428/594757db.dffcb184

I3D Light - A Simple Motion Information Stream for I3D

2023· article· en· W4379522978 on OpenAlexaff
Ruikang Luo, François Rivest, Farhana Zulkernine

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicHuman Pose and Action Recognition
Canadian institutionsRoyal Military College of CanadaQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOptical flowComputer scienceRGB color modelMotion (physics)Simple (philosophy)Artificial intelligenceExtractorComputer visionPattern recognition (psychology)Image (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Vision-based Human Activity Recognition (HAR) aims to recognize human activities based on the analysis of video data, and has extensive applications in modern industry and human life. Inflated 3D (I3D) is a deep learning architecture that is commonly used for action recognition by using two-stream video data: RGB stream and optical flow stream. I3D achieved great success on a variety of action recognition benchmarks. However, the use of optical flow incurs high computational cost, making the approach unsuitable for real-time applications. We propose an alternative simple motion information extractor to replace the optical flow branch and reduce the computational cost. It is a modified I3D that uses 128 frames of 112x112 images as input. The low spatial resolution and long temporal range of the proposed I3D RGB stream can reduce the spatial information and enhance the motion information. Experiments show that this simple motion stream can increase the accuracy of the original I3D spatial stream by 4.09% on the Kinetics 400 dataset.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.006

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.236 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHuman Pose and Action RecognitionFrench-language works237,207