MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414763755 · doi:10.1109/iccv51701.2025.01278

DuoCLR: Dual-Surrogate Contrastive Learning for Skeleton-Based Human Action Segmentation

2025· article· en· W4414763755 on OpenAlexaff
Haitao Tian

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicHuman Pose and Action Recognition
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSegmentationRepresentation (politics)Feature learningFeature (linguistics)Action (physics)Pattern recognition (psychology)Class (philosophy)Permutation (music)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, a contrastive representation learning framework is proposed to enhance human action segmentation via pre-training using trimmed (single action) skeleton sequences. Unlike previous representation learning works that are tailored for action recognition and that build upon isolated sequence-wise representations, the proposed framework focuses on exploiting multi-scale representations in conjunction with cross-sequence variations. More specifically, it proposes a novel data augmentation strategy, 'Shuffle and Warp', which exploits diverse multi-action permutations. The latter effectively assists two surrogate tasks that are introduced in contrastive learning: Cross Permutation Contrasting (CPC) and Relative Order Reasoning (ROR). In optimization, CPC learns intra-class similarities by contrasting representations of the same action class across different permutations, while ROR reasons about inter-class contexts by predicting relative mapping between two permutations. Together, these tasks enable a Dual-Surrogate Contrastive Learning (DuoCLR) network to learn multi-scale feature representations optimized for action segmentation. In experiments, DuoCLR is pre-trained on a trimmed skeleton dataset and evaluated on an untrimmed dataset where it demonstrates a significant boost over state-the-art comparatives in both multi-class and multi-label action segmentation tasks. Lastly, ablation studies are conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of each component of the proposed approach.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.933
Threshold uncertainty score0.383

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.299 · 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 designBench or experimental
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHuman Pose and Action RecognitionFrench-language works237,207