MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405812114 · doi:10.1109/tpami.2024.3522295

A Review of Deep Learning for Video Captioning

2024· review· en· W4405812114 on OpenAlexaff
Moloud Abdar, Meenakshi Kollati, Farhad Pourpanah, Daniel McDuff, Mohammad Ghavamzadeh, Shuicheng Yan, Abduallah Mohamed, Abbas Khosravi, Erik Cambria, Fatih Porikli

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMultimodal Machine Learning Applications
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClosed captioningComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceDeep learningComputer visionNatural language processingMultimediaImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Video captioning (VC) is a fast-moving, cross-disciplinary area of research that comprises contributions from domains such as computer vision, natural language processing, linguistics, and human-computer interaction. VC aims to understand a video and describe it through natural language descriptors. It plays a crucial role in various applications, from improving accessibility features such as low-vision navigation to advancing video question answering, video retrieval, and content generation. In this survey paper, we present a comprehensive review of deep learning-based VC methods. First, we provide an overview of VC, including the problem formulation, evaluation metrics, training losses, and attention-based architectures. Then, we categorize VC methods into several categories, including attention-based architectures graph networks, reinforcement learning, adversarial networks, and dense video captioning, and discuss each category in detail. In addition, we review existing data sets for VC methods and provide a discussion of research gaps and future research directions. We hope that this survey serves as a guide for researchers in relevant fields.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.003

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.315 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations28
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine IntelligenceSame topicMultimodal Machine Learning ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207