Temporal Localization of Fine-Grained Actions in Videos by Domain Transfer from Web Images

We address the problem of fine-grained action localization from temporally untrimmed web videos. We assume that only weak video-level annotations are available for training. The goal is to use these weak labels to identify temporal segments corresponding to the actions, and learn models that generalize to unconstrained web videos. We find that web images queried by action names serve as well-localized highlights for many actions, but are noisily labeled. To solve this problem, we propose a simple yet effective method that takes weak video labels and noisy image labels as input, and generates localized action frames as output. This is achieved by cross-domain transfer between video frames and web images, using pre-trained deep convolutional neural networks. We then use the localized action frames to train action recognition models with long short-term memory networks. We collect a fine-grained sports action data set FGA-240 of more than 130,000 YouTube videos. It has 240 fine-grained actions under 85 sports activities. Convincing results are shown on the FGA-240 data set, as well as the THUMOS 2014 localization data set with untrimmed training videos.Comment: Camera ready version for ACM Multimedia 201

CNN Features off-the-shelf: an Astounding Baseline for Recognition

Recent results indicate that the generic descriptors extracted from the convolutional neural networks are very powerful. This paper adds to the mounting evidence that this is indeed the case. We report on a series of experiments conducted for different recognition tasks using the publicly available code and model of the \overfeat network which was trained to perform object classification on ILSVRC13. We use features extracted from the \overfeat network as a generic image representation to tackle the diverse range of recognition tasks of object image classification, scene recognition, fine grained recognition, attribute detection and image retrieval applied to a diverse set of datasets. We selected these tasks and datasets as they gradually move further away from the original task and data the \overfeat network was trained to solve. Astonishingly, we report consistent superior results compared to the highly tuned state-of-the-art systems in all the visual classification tasks on various datasets. For instance retrieval it consistently outperforms low memory footprint methods except for sculptures dataset. The results are achieved using a linear SVM classifier (or $L2$ distance in case of retrieval) applied to a feature representation of size 4096 extracted from a layer in the net. The representations are further modified using simple augmentation techniques e.g. jittering. The results strongly suggest that features obtained from deep learning with convolutional nets should be the primary candidate in most visual recognition tasks.Comment: version 3 revisions: 1)Added results using feature processing and data augmentation 2)Referring to most recent efforts of using CNN for different visual recognition tasks 3) updated text/captio

ImageNet Large Scale Visual Recognition Challenge

The ImageNet Large Scale Visual Recognition Challenge is a benchmark in object category classification and detection on hundreds of object categories and millions of images. The challenge has been run annually from 2010 to present, attracting participation from more than fifty institutions. This paper describes the creation of this benchmark dataset and the advances in object recognition that have been possible as a result. We discuss the challenges of collecting large-scale ground truth annotation, highlight key breakthroughs in categorical object recognition, provide a detailed analysis of the current state of the field of large-scale image classification and object detection, and compare the state-of-the-art computer vision accuracy with human accuracy. We conclude with lessons learned in the five years of the challenge, and propose future directions and improvements.Comment: 43 pages, 16 figures. v3 includes additional comparisons with PASCAL VOC (per-category comparisons in Table 3, distribution of localization difficulty in Fig 16), a list of queries used for obtaining object detection images (Appendix C), and some additional reference