PreprintCited by 157Generative Adversarial Networks and Image SynthesisDigital Media Forensic DetectionAdvanced Image Processing Techniques

Adversarial Video Generation on Complex Datasets

Open access
Clark, Aidan, Donahue, Jeff, Simonyan, Karen·2019·arXiv

Abstract

Generative models of natural images have progressed towards high fidelity samples by the strong leveraging of scale. We attempt to carry this success to the field of video modeling by showing that large Generative Adversarial Networks trained on the complex Kinetics-600 dataset are able to produce video samples of substantially higher complexity and fidelity than previous work. Our proposed model, Dual Video Discriminator GAN (DVD-GAN), scales to longer and higher resolution videos by leveraging a computationally efficient decomposition of its discriminator. We evaluate on the related tasks of video synthesis and video prediction, and achieve new state-of-the-art Fréchet Inception Distance for prediction for Kinetics-600, as well as state-of-the-art Inception Score for synthesis on the UCF-101 dataset, alongside establishing a strong baseline for synthesis on Kinetics-600.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.1907.06571

Cites

10 of 10 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • DVD-GAN outperformed previous methods such as TGAN-v2 and MoCoGAN on the UCF-101 dataset in terms of IS score, although DVD-GAN conditioned its generation on class labels whereas the other approaches were unconditional.

    “It outperformed previous methods such as TGAN-v2 and MoCoGAN on the UCF-101 dataset in terms of IS score, although DVD-GAN conditioned its generation on class labels, whereas the other approaches were unconditional.”

    From Video Diffusion Models: A Survey (2024) · cites this paper as Clark et al., 2019

    Table 2 in §4.1.2 (p. 6) reports a higher UCF-101 Inception Score for DVD-GAN (32.97) than for TGANv2 (24.34) or MoCoGAN (12.42). Section 4.1 (p. 5) identifies DVD-GAN’s results as class-conditional, but our copy does not say that the TGANv2 and MoCoGAN results in the comparison were unconditional. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 53

  1. Dinesh Acharya, Zhiwu Huang, Danda Pani Paudel, and Luc Van Gool. Towards high resolution video generation with progressive growing of sliced Wasserstein GANs. arXiv:1810.02419 , 2018. · arXiv
  2. Martin Arjovsky, Soumith Chintala, and Léon Bottou. Wasserstein GAN. arXiv:1701.07875 , 2017. · arXiv
  3. Mohammad Babaeizadeh, Chelsea Finn, Dumitru Erhan, Roy H Campbell, and Sergey Levine. Stochastic variational video prediction. ICLR , 2018.
  4. Nicolas Ballas, Li Yao, Chris Pal, and Aaron Courville. Delving deeper into convolutional networks for learning video representations. arXiv:1511.06432 , 2015. · arXiv
  5. Aayush Bansal, Shugao Ma, Deva Ramanan, and Yaser Sheikh. Recycle-GAN: Unsupervised video retargeting. In ECCV , September 2018.
  6. Shane Barratt and Rishi Sharma. A note on the Inception Score. arXiv:1801.01973 , 2018. · arXiv
  7. Moshe Blank, Lena Gorelick, Eli Shechtman, Michal Irani, and Ronen Basri. Actions as space-time shapes. In ICCV , 2005.
  8. Joao Carreira, Eric Noland, Andras Banki-Horvath, Chloe Hillier, and Andrew Zisserman. A short note about Kinetics-600. arXiv:1808.01340 , 2018. · arXiv
  9. Harm De Vries, Florian Strub, Jérémie Mary, Hugo Larochelle, Olivier Pietquin, and Aaron C Courville. Modulating early visual processing by language. In NeurIPS , 2017.
  10. Emily Denton and Rob Fergus. Stochastic video generation with a learned prior. ICML , 2018.
  11. Vincent Dumoulin, Jonathon Shlens, and Manjunath Kudlur. A learned representation for artistic style. In ICLR , 2017.
  12. Frederik Ebert, Chelsea Finn, Alex X Lee, and Sergey Levine. Self-supervised visual planning with temporal skip connections. arXiv:1710.05268 , 2017. · arXiv
  13. Ian Goodfellow, Jean Pouget-Abadie, Mehdi Mirza, Bing Xu, David Warde-Farley, Sherjil Ozair, Aaron Courville, and Yoshua Bengio. Generative adversarial nets. In NeurIPS , 2014.
  14. Ishaan Gulrajani, Faruk Ahmed, Martin Arjovsky, Vincent Dumoulin, and Aaron C Courville. Improved training of Wasserstein GANs. In NeurIPS , 2017.
  15. Jun-Ting Hsieh, Bingbin Liu, De-An Huang, Li Fei-Fei, and Juan Carlos Niebles. Learning to decompose and disentangle representations for video prediction. In NeurIPS . 2018.
  16. Sergey Ioffe and Christian Szegedy. Batch normalization: Accelerating deep network training by reducing internal covariate shift. arXiv:1502.03167 , 2015. · arXiv
  17. Nal Kalchbrenner, Aäron van den Oord, Karen Simonyan, Ivo Danihelka, Oriol Vinyals, Alex Graves, and Koray Kavukcuoglu. Video pixel networks. In ICML , 2017.
  18. Will Kay, Joao Carreira, Karen Simonyan, Brian Zhang, Chloe Hillier, Sudheendra Vijayanarasimhan, Fabio Viola, Tim Green, Trevor Back, Paul Natsev, Mustafa Suleyman, and Andrew Zisserman. The Kinetics human action video dataset. arXiv:1705.06950 , 2017. · arXiv
  19. Durk P Kingma and Prafulla Dhariwal. Glow: Generative flow with invertible 1x1 convolutions. In NeurIPS , 2018.
  20. Manoj Kumar, Mohammad Babaeizadeh, Dumitru Erhan, Chelsea Finn, Sergey Levine, Laurent Dinh, and Durk Kingma. VideoFlow: A flow-based generative model for video. arXiv:1903.01434 , 2019. · arXiv
  21. Alex X Lee, Richard Zhang, Frederik Ebert, Pieter Abbeel, Chelsea Finn, and Sergey Levine. Stochastic adversarial video prediction. arXiv:1804.01523 , 2018. · arXiv
  22. Jimmy Lei Ba, Jamie Ryan Kiros, and Geoffrey E Hinton. Layer normalization. arXiv:1607.06450 , 2016. · arXiv
  23. Yitong Li, Martin Renqiang Min, Dinghan Shen, David Carlson, and Lawrence Carin. Video generation from text. In Thirty-Second AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence , 2018.
  24. Jae Hyun Lim and Jong Chul Ye. Geometric GAN. arXiv:1705.02894 , 2017. · arXiv
  25. Michael Mathieu, Camille Couprie, and Yann LeCun. Deep multi-scale video prediction beyond mean square error. arXiv:1511.05440 , 2015. · arXiv
  26. Jacob Menick and Nal Kalchbrenner. Generating high fidelity images with subscale pixel networks and multidimensional upscaling. In ICLR , 2019.
  27. Takeru Miyato and Masanori Koyama. cGANs with projection discriminator. arXiv:1802.05637 , 2018. · arXiv
  28. Takeru Miyato, Toshiki Kataoka, Masanori Koyama, and Yuichi Yoshida. Spectral normalization for generative adversarial networks. arXiv:1802.05957 , 2018. · arXiv
  29. Katsunori Ohnishi, Shohei Yamamoto, Yoshitaka Ushiku, and Tatsuya Harada. Hierarchical video generation from orthogonal information: Optical flow and texture. In AAAI , 2018.
  30. Marc'Aurelio Ranzato, Arthur Szlam, Joan Bruna, Michaël Mathieu, Ronan Collobert, and Sumit Chopra. Video (language) modeling: a baseline for generative models of natural videos. arXiv:1412.6604 , 2014. · arXiv
  31. Ali Razavi, Aaron van den Oord, and Oriol Vinyals. Generating diverse high-fidelity images with VQ-VAE-2. arXiv preprint arXiv:1906.00446 , 2019. · arXiv
  32. Masaki Saito and Shunta Saito. TGANv2: Efficient training of large models for video generation with multiple subsampling layers. arXiv:1811.09245 , 2018. · arXiv
  33. Masaki Saito, Eiichi Matsumoto, and Shunta Saito. Temporal generative adversarial nets with singular value clipping. In ICCV , 2017.
  34. Mehdi SM Sajjadi, Olivier Bachem, Mario Lucic, Olivier Bousquet, and Sylvain Gelly. Assessing generative models via precision and recall. In NeurIPS , 2018.
  35. Tim Salimans, Ian Goodfellow, Wojciech Zaremba, Vicki Cheung, Alec Radford, and Xi Chen. Improved techniques for training GANs. In NeurIPS , 2016.
  36. Andrew M Saxe, James L McClelland, and Surya Ganguli. Exact solutions to the nonlinear dynamics of learning in deep linear neural networks. arXiv:1312.6120 , 2013. · arXiv
  37. Khurram Soomro, Amir Roshan Zamir, and Mubarak Shah. UCF101: A dataset of 101 human actions classes from videos in the wild. arXiv:1212.0402 , 2012. · arXiv
  38. Concetto Spampinato, Sergio Palazzo, P D'Oro, Francesca Murabito, Daniela Giordano, and M Shah. VOS-GAN: Adversarial learning of visual-temporal dynamics for unsupervised dense prediction in videos. arXiv:1803.09092 , 2018. · arXiv
  39. Ximeng Sun, Huijuan Xu, and Kate Saenko. A two-stream variational adversarial network for video generation. arXiv:1812.01037 , 2018. · arXiv
  40. Ilya Sutskever, James Martens, and Geoffrey E Hinton. Generating text with recurrent neural networks. In ICML , 2011.
  41. Christian Szegedy, Vincent Vanhoucke, Sergey Ioffe, Jonathon Shlens, and Zbigniew Wojna. Rethinking the Inception architecture for computer vision. In CVPR , 2016.
  42. Seiya Tokui, Kenta Oono, Shohei Hido, and Justin Clayton. Chainer: a next-generation open source framework for deep learning. In Workshop on Systems for ML and Open Source Software at NeurIPS , 2015.
  43. Sergey Tulyakov, Ming-Yu Liu, Xiaodong Yang, and Jan Kautz. MoCoGAN: Decomposing motion and content for video generation. In CVPR , 2018.
  44. Dmitry Ulyanov, Andrea Vedaldi, and Victor Lempitsky. Instance normalization: The missing ingredient for fast stylization. arXiv:1607.08022 , 2016. · arXiv
  45. Thomas Unterthiner, Sjoerd van Steenkiste, Karol Kurach, Raphael Marinier, Marcin Michalski, and Sylvain Gelly. Towards accurate generative models of video: A new metric & challenges. arXiv:1812.01717 , 2018. · arXiv
  46. Ashish Vaswani, Noam Shazeer, Niki Parmar, Jakob Uszkoreit, Llion Jones, Aidan N Gomez, Łukasz Kaiser, and Illia Polosukhin. Attention is all you need. In NeurIPS , 2017.
  47. Ruben Villegas, Jimei Yang, Yuliang Zou, Sungryull Sohn, Xunyu Lin, and Honglak Lee. Learning to generate long-term future via hierarchical prediction. In ICML , 2017.
  48. Carl Vondrick, Hamed Pirsiavash, and Antonio Torralba. Generating videos with scene dynamics. In NeurIPS , 2016.
  49. Jacob Walker, Kenneth Marino, Abhinav Gupta, and Martial Hebert. The pose knows: Video forecasting by generating pose futures. In ICCV , 2017.
  50. Dirk Weissenborn, Oscar Täckström, and Jakob Uszkoreit. Scaling autoregressive video models. arXiv:1906.02634 , 2019. · arXiv
  51. Yuxin Wu and Kaiming He. Group normalization. In ECCV , 2018.
  52. Ceyuan Yang, Zhe Wang, Xinge Zhu, Chen Huang, Jianping Shi, and Dahua Lin. Pose guided human video generation. In ECCV , 2018.
  53. Yipin Zhou, Zhaowen Wang, Chen Fang, Trung Bui, and Tamara L Berg. Dance dance generation: Motion transfer for internet videos. arXiv:1904.00129 , 2019. · arXiv

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Clark, A., Donahue, J., & Simonyan, K.
Affiliations
Google (United States) (US)
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2019
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2976617189
Cited by
157
References
10
Citations by year
2025: 3 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 36 · 2022: 30 · 2021: 46 · 2020: 22 · 2019: 3
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Generative Adversarial Networks and Image Synthesis
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Digital Media Forensic Detection
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Image Processing Techniques
Keywords
video generation, generative adversarial networks, video prediction, UCF101, Fréchet Inception Distance, Inception Score

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