4.7 Article

Mimetics: Towards Understanding Human Actions Out of Context

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF COMPUTER VISION
卷 129, 期 5, 页码 1675-1690

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11263-021-01446-y

关键词

Biases in action recognition; Mimes; Pose-based action recognition

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Recent video action recognition methods have achieved outstanding performances by leveraging context, but often neglect the importance of truly understanding human actions. By introducing the Mimetics dataset and demonstrating the effectiveness of utilizing human pose features, we emphasize the importance of overcoming context biases in action recognition.
Recent methods for video action recognition have reached outstanding performances on existing benchmarks. However, they tend to leverage context such as scenes or objects instead of focusing on understanding the human action itself. For instance, a tennis field leads to the prediction playing tennis irrespectively of the actions performed in the video. In contrast, humans have a more complete understanding of actions and can recognize them without context. The best example of out-of-context actions are mimes, that people can typically recognize despite missing relevant objects and scenes. In this paper, we propose to benchmark action recognition methods in such absence of context and introduce a novel dataset, Mimetics, consisting of mimed actions for a subset of 50 classes from the Kinetics benchmark. Our experiments show that (a) state-of-the-art 3D convolutional neural networks obtain disappointing results on such videos, highlighting the lack of true understanding of the human actions and (b) models leveraging body language via human pose are less prone to context biases. In particular, we show that applying a shallow neural network with a single temporal convolution over body pose features transferred to the action recognition problem performs surprisingly well compared to 3D action recognition methods.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据