MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415535455 · doi:10.1145/3746027.3758147

Generative Flow Networks for Personalized Multimedia Systems: A Case Study on Short Video Feeds

2025· article· en· W4415535455 on OpenAlexaff
Yili Jin, Ling Pan, Rui-Xiao Zhang, Jiangchuan Liu, Xue Liu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage and Video Quality Assessment
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPersonalizationScalabilityAdaptabilityGenerative grammarResource (disambiguation)Reinforcement learningGenerative model

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multimedia systems underpin modern digital interactions, facilitating seamless integration and optimization of resources across diverse multimedia applications. To meet growing personalization demands, multimedia systems must efficiently manage competing resource needs, adaptive content, and user-specific data handling. This paper introduces Generative Flow Networks (GFlowNets, GFNs) as a brave new framework for enabling personalized multimedia systems. By integrating multi-candidate generative modeling with flow-based principles, GFlowNets offer a scalable and flexible solution for enhancing user-specific multimedia experiences. To illustrate the effectiveness of GFlowNets, we focus on short video feeds, a multimedia application characterized by high personalization demands and significant resource constraints, as a case study. Our proposed GFlowNet-based personalized feeds algorithm demonstrates superior performance compared to traditional rule-based and reinforcement learning methods across critical metrics, including video quality, resource utilization efficiency, and delivery cost. Moreover, we propose a unified GFlowNet-based framework generalizable to other multimedia systems, highlighting its adaptability and wide-ranging applicability. These findings underscore the potential of GFlowNets to advance personalized multimedia systems by addressing complex optimization challenges and supporting sophisticated multimedia application scenarios.

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)0.001
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 score0.926
Threshold uncertainty score0.697

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.311 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicImage and Video Quality AssessmentFrench-language works237,207