MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386159122 · doi:10.1109/icme55011.2023.00259

CHAN: Cross-Modal Hybrid Attention Network for Temporal Language Grounding in Videos

2023· article· en· W4386159122 on OpenAlexaff
Wen Wang, Ling Zhong, Guang Gao, Minhong Wan, Jason Gu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMultimodal Machine Learning Applications
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersChina Postdoctoral Science Foundation
KeywordsComputer scienceModality (human–computer interaction)ModalitiesModalSemantics (computer science)SentenceFrame (networking)Key (lock)Artificial intelligenceNatural language processingWord (group theory)Task (project management)Focus (optics)Speech recognitionLinguisticsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The goal of temporal language grounding (TLG) task is to temporally localize the most semantically matched video segment with respect to a given sentence query in an untrimmed video. How to effectively incorporate the cross-modal interactions between video and language is the key to improve grounding performance. Previous approaches focus on learning correlations by computing the attention matrix between each frame-word pair, while ignoring the global semantics conditioned on one modality for better associating the complex video contents and sentence query of the target modality. In this paper, we propose a novel Cross-modal Hybrid Attention Network, which integrates two parallel attention fusion modules to exploit the semantics of each modality and interactions in cross modalities. One is Intra-Modal Attention Fusion, which utilizes gated self-attention to capture the frame-by-frame and word-by-word relations conditioned on the other modality. The other is Inter-Modal Attention Fusion, which utilizes query and key features derived from different modalities to calculate the co-attention weights and further promote inter-modal fusion. Experimental results show that our CHAN significantly outperforms several existing state-of-the-arts on three challenging datasets (ActivityNet Captions, Charades-STA and TACOS), demonstrating the effectiveness of our proposed method.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.341
Teacher spread0.320 · 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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMultimodal Machine Learning ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207