MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399368852 · doi:10.21428/d82e957c.3da7f032

POPCat: Propagation of Particles for Complex Annotation Tasks

2024· preprint· en· W4399368852 on OpenAlexaff
Adam Srebrnjak Yang, Dheeraj Khanna, John Zelek

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVideo Surveillance and Tracking Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial intelligencePipeline (software)SegmentationAnnotationMargin (machine learning)Set (abstract data type)Video trackingComputer visionPrecision and recallPattern recognition (psychology)Object (grammar)GeneralizationTracking (education)Object detectionFrame (networking)Machine learningMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Novel dataset creation for all multi-object tracking, crowd-counting, and industrial-based videos is arduous and time-consuming when faced with a unique class that densely populates a video sequence. We propose a time efficient method called POPCat that exploits the multi-target and temporal features of video data to produce a semi-supervised pipeline for segmentation or box-based video annotation. The method retains the accuracy level associated with human level annotation while generating a large volume of semi-supervised annotations for greater generalization. The method capitalizes on temporal features through the use of a particle tracker to expand the domain of human-provided target points. This is done through the use of a particle tracker to reassociate the initial points to a set of images that follow the labeled frame. A YOLO model is then trained with this generated data, and then rapidly infers on the target video. Evaluations are conducted on GMOT-40, AnimalTrack, and Visdrone-2019 benchmarks. These multi-target video tracking/detection sets contain multiple similar-looking targets, camera movements, and other features that would commonly be seen in “wild” situations. We specifically choose these difficult datasets to demonstrate the efficacy of the pipeline and for comparison purposes. The method applied on GMOT-40, AnimalTrack, and Visdrone shows a margin of improvement on recall/mAP50/mAP over the best results by a value of 24.5%/9.6%/4.8%, -/43.1%/27.8%, and 7.5%/9.4%/7.5% where metrics were collected.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.063

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0050.003
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.005

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.

Opus teacher head0.102
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.269 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicVideo Surveillance and Tracking MethodsFrench-language works237,207