Test-Time Adaptation for Optical Flow Estimation Using Motion Vectors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Due to the prohibitive cost as well as technical challenges in annotating ground-truth optical flow for large-scale realistic video datasets, the existing deep learning models for optical flow estimation mostly rely on synthetic data for training, which in turn may lead to significant performance degradation under test-data distribution shift in real-world environments. In this work, we propose the methodology to tackle this important problem. We design a self-supervised learning task for adjusting the optical flow estimation model at test time. We exploit the fact that most videos are stored in compressed formats, from which compact information on motion, in the form of motion vectors and residuals, can be made readily available. We formulate the self-supervised task as motion vector prediction, and link this task to optical flow estimation. To the best of our knowledge, our Test-Time Adaption guided with Motion Vectors (TTA-MV), is the first work to perform such adaptation for optical flow. The experimental results demonstrate that TTA-MV can improve the generalization capability of various well-known deep learning methods for optical flow estimation, such as FlowNet, PWCNet, and RAFT.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".