The DOI matches its DataCite record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Learning to Generate Long-term Future via Hierarchical Prediction
Abstract
We propose a hierarchical approach for making long-term predictions of future frames. To avoid inherent compounding errors in recursive pixel-level prediction, we propose to first estimate high-level structure in the input frames, then predict how that structure evolves in the future, and finally by observing a single frame from the past and the predicted high-level structure, we construct the future frames without having to observe any of the pixel-level predictions. Long-term video prediction is difficult to perform by recurrently observing the predicted frames because the small errors in pixel space exponentially amplify as predictions are made deeper into the future. Our approach prevents pixel-level error propagation from happening by removing the need to observe the predicted frames. Our model is built with a combination of LSTM and analogy based encoder-decoder convolutional neural networks, which independently predict the video structure and generate the future frames, respectively. In experiments, our model is evaluated on the Human3.6M and Penn Action datasets on the task of long-term pixel-level video prediction of humans performing actions and demonstrate significantly better results than the state-of-the-art.
Verifying this paper
8 of 9 steps done · this page updates itself — you can leave and come back
- Registry recordVerified
- Full textFetching the open-access text — a few minutes for a paper we haven’t read before
- Reference listNot fetched yet
- Reference checkNot run yet for this paper
- StatisticsNeeds the full text
- ClaimsNeeds the full text
- Cited sourcesNeeds claims to check
- Self-checkNeeds the full text
- VerificationFindings verified
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Stacked Hourglass Networks for Human Pose Estimation
Newell, A., Yang, K., & Deng, J. (2016) · Lecture Notes in Computer Science · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-46484-8_29 · Cited by 5,634
Human3.6M: Large Scale Datasets and Predictive Methods for 3D Human Sensing in Natural Environments
Ionescu, C., Papava, D., Olaru, V., & Sminchisescu, C. (2014) · IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence · doi:10.1109/tpami.2013.248 · Cited by 3,653 · cited 2×
“In this section, we present experiments on pixel-level video prediction of human actions on the Penn Action (Weiyu Zhang & Derpanis, 2013) and Human 3.6M datasets (Ionescu et al., 2014).”
MethodInfluential
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Chan, C., Ginosar, S., Zhou, T., & Efros, A. (2019) · 2019 IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV) · doi:10.1109/iccv.2019.00603 · Cited by 737
Video Coding for Machines: A Paradigm of Collaborative Compression and Intelligent Analytics
Duan, L., Liu, J., Yang, W., Huang, T., & Gao, W. (2020) · IEEE Transactions on Image Processing · doi:10.1109/tip.2020.3016485 · Cited by 260
Illusory Motion Reproduced by Deep Neural Networks Trained for Prediction
Watanabe, E., Kitaoka, A., Sakamoto, K., Yasugi, M., & Tanaka, K. (2018) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00345 · Cited by 101
Metadata
- Authors
- Villegas, R., Yang, J., Zou, Y., Sohn, S., Lin, X., & Lee, H.
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2017
- arXiv
- 1704.05831
- References
- 2
- Type
- Preprint
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review