Computerized Assessment of Motor Imitation for Distinguishing Autism in Video (CAMI-2DNet)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Motor imitation impairments are commonly reported in individuals with autism spectrum conditions (ASCs), suggesting that motor imitation could be used as a phenotype for addressing autism heterogeneity. Traditional methods for assessing motor imitation are subjective and labor-intensive, and require extensive human training. Modern Computerized Assessment of Motor Imitation (CAMI) methods, such as CAMI-3D for motion capture data and CAMI-2D for video data, are less subjective. However, they rely on labor-intensive data normalization and cleaning techniques, and human annotations for algorithm training. To address these challenges, we propose CAMI-2DNet, a scalable and interpretable deep learning-based approach to motor imitation assessment in video data, which eliminates the need for ad hoc normalization, cleaning, and annotation. CAMI-2DNet uses an encoder-decoder architecture to map a video to a motion representation that is disentangled from nuisance factors such as body shape and camera views. To learn a disentangled representation, we employ synthetic data generated by motion retargeting of virtual characters through the reshuffling of motion, body shape, and camera views, as well as real participant data. To automatically assess how well an individual imitates an actor, we compute a similarity score between their motion encoding, and use it to discriminate individuals with ASCs from neurotypical (NT) individuals. Our comparative analysis demonstrates that CAMI-2DNet has a strong correlation with human scores while outperforming CAMI-2D in discriminating ASC vs NT children. Moreover, CAMI-2DNet performs comparably to CAMI-3D while offering greater practicality by operating directly on video data and without the need for ad hoc normalization and human annotations.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".