MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400527955 · doi:10.1109/fg59268.2024.10582018

Audio-Visual Person Verification Based on Recursive Fusion of Joint Cross-Attention

2024· article· en· W4400527955 on OpenAlexafffund
R. Gnana Praveen, Jahangir Alam

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVideo Surveillance and Tracking Methods
Canadian institutionsComputer Research Institute of Montréal
FundersGovernment of Canada
KeywordsJoint (building)Computer scienceAudio visualJoint attentionFusionSpeech recognitionArtificial intelligenceHuman–computer interactionMultimediaPsychologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Person or identity verification has been recently gaining a lot of attention using audio-visual fusion as faces and voices share close associations with each other. Conventional approaches based on audio-visual fusion rely on score-level or early feature-level fusion techniques. Though existing approaches showed improvement over unimodal systems, the potential of audio-visual fusion for person verification is not fully exploited. In this paper, we have investigated the prospect of effectively capturing both intra- and inter-modal relationships across audio and visual modalities, which can play a crucial role in significantly improving the fusion performance over unimodal systems. In particular, we introduce a recursive fusion of a joint cross-attentional model, where a joint audio-visual feature representation is employed in the cross-attention framework in a recursive fashion to progressively refine the feature representations that can efficiently capture the intra- and inter-modal relationships. To further enhance the audio-visual feature representations, we have also explored BLSTMs to improve the temporal modeling of audio-visual feature representations. Extensive experiments are conducted on the Voxceleb1 dataset to evaluate the proposed model. Results indicate that the proposed model shows promising improvement in fusion performance by adeptly capturing the intra- and inter-modal relationships across audio and visual modalities. Code is available at https://github.com/praveena2j/RJCAforSpeakerVerification

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.298 · 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

Citations6
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicVideo Surveillance and Tracking MethodsFrench-language works237,207