MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385805191 · doi:10.1109/cvprw59228.2023.00290

Multi-Task Learning based Video Anomaly Detection with Attention

2023· article· en· W4385805191 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammad Baradaran, Robert Bergevin

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAnomaly Detection Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceAnomaly detectionLeverage (statistics)Computer visionOptical flowSegmentationMotion (physics)Context (archaeology)Object detectionPattern recognition (psychology)Image (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multi-task learning based video anomaly detection methods combine multiple proxy tasks in different branches to detect video anomalies in different situations. Most existing methods suffer from one of these shortcomings: I) Combination of proxy tasks in their methods is not in a complementary and explainable way. II) Class of the object is not effectively considered. III) All motion anomaly cases are not covered. IV) Context information is not engaged in anomaly detection. To address these shortcomings, we propose a novel multi-task learning based method that combines complementary proxy tasks to better consider the motion and appearance features. In one branch, motivated by the abilities of the semantic segmentation and future frame prediction tasks, we combine them into a novel task of future semantic segmentation prediction to learn normal object classes and consistent motion patterns, and to detect respective anomalies simultaneously. In the second branch, we leverage optical flow magnitude estimation for motion anomaly detection and we propose an attention mechanism to engage context information in normal motion modeling and to detect motion anomalies with attention to object parts, the direction of motion, and the distance of the objects from the camera. Our qualitative results show that the proposed method considers the object class effectively and learns motion with attention to the aforementioned determinant factors which results in precise motion modeling and better motion anomaly detection. Additionally, quantitative results show the superiority of our method compared with state-of-the-art methods.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.228 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations11
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAnomaly Detection Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207