MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415428950 · doi:10.3233/faia250861

FTIO: Frequent Temporally Integrated Objects

2025· book-chapter· W4415428950 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammad Mohammadzadeh Kalati, Farhad Maleki, Ian McQuillan

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in artificial intelligence and applications · 2025
Typebook-chapter
Language
FieldComputer Science
TopicDistributed and Parallel Computing Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsObject (grammar)SegmentationSalientProcess (computing)Key (lock)Code (set theory)Tracking (education)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Predicting and tracking objects in real-world scenarios is a critical challenge in Video Object Segmentation (VOS) tasks. Unsupervised VOS (UVOS) has the additional challenge of finding an initial segmentation of salient objects, which affects the entire process and keeps a permanent uncertainty about the object proposals. Moreover, deformation and fast motion can lead to temporal inconsistencies. To address these problems, we propose Frequent Temporally Integrated Objects (FTIO), a post-processing framework with two key components. First, we introduce a combined criterion to improve object selection, mitigating failures common in UVOS—particularly when objects are small or structurally complex—by extracting frequently appearing salient objects. Second, we present a three-stage method to correct temporal inconsistencies by integrating missing object mask regions. Experimental results demonstrate that FTIO achieves state-of-the-art performance in multi-object UVOS. Code is available at: https://github.com/MohammadMohammadzadehKalati/FTIO.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.003

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in artificial intelligence and applicationsSame topicDistributed and Parallel Computing SystemsFrench-language works237,207