Few-Shot Personality-Specific Image Captioning via Meta-Learning
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
In standard captioning, the characteristics of the end-user whom we generate the caption for are ignored. This is mainly because more than often we do not have access to the entire spectrum of personality characteristics for our user. In other words, each user in test time can exhibit different traits to which we need to adapt our model. Therefore, we focus on generating personalized image captioning and formulate the problem as a few-shot learning setting. To the best of our knowledge, we are the first to study this problem and shed light on the challenges involved with this setting. Furthermore, we propose a MAML-based few-shot learner enabling the model to learn a new personality style from only a handful of annotated samples. Finally, we set up baselines for the problem and show that our proposed method is superior in performance when compared with baselines on the benchmark dataset. Ablation studies are conducted to investigate different design choices' effects on the model performance.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.005 |
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