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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This is a dataset of 120 error-concealed video clips. The clips were generated from 6 CIF, 6 HD and 6 Full-HD test video sequences. Each of those sequences was error concealed with 4 Error Concealment (EC) techniques: Motion Copy, Motion Vector Extrapolation, Decoder Motion Vector Estimation (DMVE) + Boundary Matching Algorithm (BMA), and Adaptive Error Concealment Order Determination (AECOD). The dataset also includes the original (loss free) video clips, as well as the subjective ranking of the error-concealed videos. The original purpose for generating this dataset is to evaluate the performance of various Image/Video Quality Assessment (I/VQA) methods in how well they compare the quality of error-concealed videos. In other words, if the output of EC technique A is a better-quality video than EC technique B, which I/VQA metric predicts this correctly.For more information please refer to the following paper:M. Kazemi, M. Ghanbari, and S. Shirmohammadi, “The Performance of Quality Metrics in Assessing Error-Concealed Video Quality,” IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, vol. 29, pp. 5937-5952, 2020.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.429 |
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 it