MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7017307048

Automatic audience-informed video summarization of hockey broadcasts

2021· dissertation· en· W7017307048 on OpenAlexafffund

Bibliographic record

VenueeScholarship@McGill (McGill) · 2021
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVideo Analysis and Summarization
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersMcGill University
KeywordsAutomatic summarizationLeverage (statistics)Key (lock)Convolutional neural networkSet (abstract data type)Video game
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the past decade, online video has risen to become one of the most common ways of sharing and consuming media.With so much video content readily-available, browsing or processing these data is difficult due to the long duration of a typical video.Video summaries, on the other hand, provide an effective way for viewers to enjoy the highlights of a video without having to watch the entire video.In this work, we propose a system that automatically summarizes hockey broadcasts into highlight videos.We leverage the audience of a game-both the broadcasters and the crowd-to decide which shots should be included in the final highlight reel.We argue that since the game is directly sourced by the crowd and the broadcasters, our direct approach is more effective than similar techniques in the literature which rely on external annotators.Our system accomplishes this by first extracting video and audio features using convolutional neural networks (CNN) and searching for key indicators of excitement (e.g.cheering or celebration).Lastly, the best highlights are dynamically selected under a set of constraints (such as output duration) and composited into the final summary.Our results demonstrate that this technique accurately extracts the most exciting moments of a hockey game while avoiding the bias from using predetermined metrics or external annotations.i

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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.743
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.003
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.232 · 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.

Study designOther design
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
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeScholarship@McGill (McGill)Same topicVideo Analysis and SummarizationFrench-language works237,207