MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409263528 · doi:10.1109/wacv61041.2025.00416

Graph-Jigsaw Conditioned Diffusion Model for Skeleton-Based Video Anomaly Detection

2025· article· en· W4409263528 on OpenAlexaff
Ali Karami, Thi Kieu Khanh Ho, Narges Armanfard

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAnomaly Detection Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJigsawComputer scienceSkeleton (computer programming)Anomaly detectionGraphArtificial intelligenceComputer visionTheoretical computer scienceMathematicsProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Skeleton-based video anomaly detection (SVAD) is a crucial task in computer vision. Accurately identifying abnormal patterns or events enables operators to promptly de-tect suspicious activities, thereby enhancing safety. Achieving this demands a comprehensive understanding of human motions, both at body and region levels, while also accounting for the wide variations of performing a single action. However, existing studies fail to simultaneously address these crucial properties. This paper introduces a novel, practical, and lightweight framework, namely Graph-Jigsaw Conditioned Diffusion Model for Skeleton-based Video Anomaly Detection (GiCiSAD) to overcome the challenges associated with SVAD. GiCiSAD consists of three novel modules: the Graph Attention-based Forecasting module to capture the spatio-temporal dependencies inherent in the data, the Graph-level Jigsaw Puzzle Maker module to distinguish subtle region-level discrepancies between normal and abnormal motions, and the Graph-based Conditional Diffusion model to generate a wide spectrum of human motions. Extensive experiments on four widely used skeleton-based video datasets show that GiCiSAD outperforms existing methods with significantly fewer training parameters, establishing it as the new state-of-the-art.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.872
Threshold uncertainty score0.493

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.259
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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAnomaly Detection Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207