MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Harnessing the Capabilities of OpenAI’s CLIP and RNN for Visual Sequence Understanding in Film Editing

2024· article· en· W4402981488 on OpenAlexaff
R J Anandhi, Shaik Anjimoon, Sandeep Tiwari, Navdeep Singh, Ashish Parmar, Alabboodi Ahmed Sahib Faisal

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVideo Analysis and Summarization
Canadian institutionsHorizon College and Seminary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceSequence (biology)Artificial intelligenceHuman–computer interactionProgramming languageChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using OpenAI’s Contrastive Language-Image Pretraining (CLIP) and Recurrent Neural Network (RNN) technology, this study develops a novel approach to video editing. Our proposed workflow, which consists of three primary techniques, alters the use of visual order information in film editing. Story speed, scene selection, and CLIP’s multimodal comprehension are all enhanced when RNN’s time analysis is applied in tandem with it. To locate pertinent visual content using semantic matching and textual descriptions, Scene Retrieval and Semantic Matching (SRSM) first use CLIP. To find the optimal pace for film sequences, the second technique, TAPO, employs recurrent neural networks (RNNs) to analyze how time evolves. The third application that creates music to match the atmosphere of movie sequences is Adaptive Soundtrack Generation (ASG). These techniques, when used, make the experience of going to the movies more enjoyable for everyone. Our approach is clearly superior to the conventional methods of film editing, as demonstrated by our comprehensive study. Emotional impact, narrative coherence, audience happiness, immersion, and anticipation value were all highly rated, indicating that viewers were highly engaged. Its entertaining qualities have also garnered rave reviews. These figures suggest that our innovative approach to film editing has the potential to shake up the industry with its innovative features.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.972
Threshold uncertainty score0.326

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicVideo Analysis and SummarizationFrench-language works237,207