MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409574797 · doi:10.61091/jcmcc127a-066

Research on Human Action Detection and Recognition Methods Based on Interpretable Artificial Intelligence

2025· article· en· W4409574797 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Combinatorial Mathematics and Combinatorial Computing · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Technologies in Various Fields
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceAction recognitionAction (physics)Computer sciencePattern recognition (psychology)Physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Deep learning-based methods can be combined with skeleton data, but they only consider the feature vectors formed by joint coordinates and do not extract the spatio-temporal dependencies between skeletons. In order to provide a more comprehensive detection and recognition of spatio-temporal relationships in human action sequences, this paper proposes a graph neural network-based human action detection and recognition method by combining YOLOv5, AlphaPose, and spatio-temporal graph convolutional network (ST-GCN) algorithms under the interpretable artificial intelligence (XAI) perspective. Firstly, the improved YOLOv5s target detection algorithm is used to get the human body detection frame and obtain the human body position information, then the AlphaPose pose estimation algorithm is used to obtain the coordinate information of the joint points of the human skeleton, and finally the improved ST-GCN algorithm is used to construct the spatio-temporal graph and extract the spatio-temporal dependencies between the joints to complete the human body action recognition. Through experimental verification, the method can accurately recognize human fall, running, kicking, and squatting actions on the dataset, with a recognition accuracy of 92.04%, and compared with the five baseline models, the method has higher recognition accuracy, with the values of each index greater than 91%, which can provide technical support for human behavior recognition.

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.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.832
Threshold uncertainty score0.813

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.109
GPT teacher head0.429
Teacher spread0.319 · 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