PreprintCited by 10Multimodal Machine Learning ApplicationsInformation Retrieval and Search BehaviorMemory Processes and Influences

The DOI matches its DataCite record.

Encode-Store-Retrieve: Augmenting Human Memory through Language-Encoded Egocentric Perception

Open access

Abstract

We depend on our own memory to encode, store, and retrieve our experiences. However, memory lapses can occur. One promising avenue for achieving memory augmentation is through the use of augmented reality head-mounted displays to capture and preserve egocentric videos, a practice commonly referred to as lifelogging. However, a significant challenge arises from the sheer volume of video data generated through lifelogging, as the current technology lacks the capability to encode and store such large amounts of data efficiently. Further, retrieving specific information from extensive video archives requires substantial computational power, further complicating the task of quickly accessing desired content. To address these challenges, we propose a memory augmentation agent that involves leveraging natural language encoding for video data and storing them in a vector database. This approach harnesses the power of large vision language models to perform the language encoding process. Additionally, we propose using large language models to facilitate natural language querying. Our agent underwent extensive evaluation using the QA-Ego4D dataset and achieved state-of-the-art results with a BLEU score of 8.3, outperforming conventional machine learning models that scored between 3.4 and 5.8. Additionally, we conducted a user study in which participants interacted with the human memory augmentation agent through episodic memory and open-ended questions. The results of this study show that the agent results in significantly better recall performance on episodic memory tasks compared to human participants. The results also highlight the agent's practical applicability and user acceptance.

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.

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

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.2308.05822

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.

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?

  • Incorporating long-term memory significantly enhances video understanding by enabling the storage and retrieval of key video information for subsequent tasks.

    “Incorporating long-term memory significantly enhances video understanding by enabling the storage and retrieval of key video information for subsequent tasks [11, 13].”

    From Human-inspired Perspectives: A Survey on AI Long-term Memory (2024) · cites this paper as [13]

    The Introduction describes storing encoded egocentric-video information in a vector database for later retrieval and question answering. Section 4.4 reports that the language-encoded system significantly outperformed conventional models on an episodic-memory question-answering task. The paper does not establish that adding long-term memory itself caused the improvement, or that the result extends to video understanding generally. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • A typical video understanding pipeline driven by long-term memory converts video frames into feature vectors, which can later be retrieved to support various tasks.

    “A typical video understanding pipeline driven by long-term memory converts video frames into feature vectors, which can later be retrieved to support various tasks [11, 12, 13, 14, 15].”

    From Human-inspired Perspectives: A Survey on AI Long-term Memory (2024) · cites this paper as [13]

    The Introduction describes encoding egocentric video, storing language embeddings in a vector database, and retrieving them for episodic-memory question answering. Section 5.1.4 likewise describes storing encoded frames for retrieval. The source supports this pipeline as an example, but does not establish that it is typical or that the retrieved vectors support various tasks beyond the question-answering use described. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Some AI systems store long-term memory in external storage media, such as databases, outside the AI models.

    “On the other hand, ome AI systems store long-term memory in external storage medias, such as databases, outside the AI models [241, 250, 13].”

    From Human-inspired Perspectives: A Survey on AI Long-term Memory (2024) · cites this paper as [13]

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

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 46

  1. R. T. Azuma. A survey of augmented reality. Presence: Teleoperators & Virtual Environments, 6(4):355-385, 1997.
  2. S. Banerjee and A. Lavie. Meteor: An automatic metric for mt evalua- tion with improved correlation with human judgments. In Proceedings of the acl workshop on intrinsic and extrinsic evaluation measures for machine translation and/or summarization, pp. 65-72, 2005.
  3. L. Bärmann and A. Waibel. Where did i leave my keys?-episodic- memory-based question answering on egocentric videos. In Proceed- ings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pp. 1560-1568, 2022.
  4. Y. Chen and G. J. Jones. Augmenting human memory using personal lifelogs. In Proceedings of the 1st augmented human international conference, pp. 1-9, 2010.
  5. C. Creed, M. Al-Kalbani, A. Theil, S. Sarcar, and I. Williams. Inclusive ar/vr: accessibility barriers for immersive technologies. Universal Access in the Information Society, 23(1):59-73, 2024.
  6. T. Dao, D. Fu, S. Ermon, A. Rudra, and C. Ré. Flashattention: Fast and memory-efficient exact attention with io-awareness. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 35:16344-16359, 2022.
  7. N. Davies, A. Friday, S. Clinch, C. Sas, M. Langheinrich, G. Ward, and A. Schmidt. Security and privacy implications of pervasive memory augmentation. IEEE Pervasive Computing, 14:44-53, 01 2015. doi: 10 .1109/MPRV.2015.13 · DOI
  8. T. Dingler, P. E. Agroudy, R. Rzayev, L. Lischke, T. Machulla, and A. Schmidt. Memory augmentation through lifelogging: opportunities and challenges. Technology-Augmented Perception and Cognition, pp. 47-69, 2021.
  9. A. R. Doherty, K. Pauly-Takacs, N. Caprani, C. Gurrin, C. J. Moulin, N. E. O'Connor, and A. F. Smeaton. Experiences of aiding autobio- graphical memory using the sensecam. Human-Computer Interaction, 27(1-2):151-174, 2012.
  10. J. Gao, C. Sun, Z. Yang, and R. Nevatia. Tall: Temporal activity local- ization via language query. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV), 2017.
  11. K. Grauman, A. Westbury, E. Byrne, Z. Chavis, A. Furnari, R. Girdhar, J. Hamburger, H. Jiang, M. Liu, X. Liu, et al. Ego4d: Around the world in 3,000 hours of egocentric video. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pp. 18995- 19012, 2022.
  12. A. Graves, G. Wayne, M. Reynolds, T. Harley, I. Danihelka, A. Grabska-Barwińska, S. G. Colmenarejo, E. Grefenstette, T. Ra- malho, J. Agapiou, et al. Hybrid computing using a neural network with dynamic external memory. Nature, 538(7626):471-476, 2016.
  13. C. Gurrin, R. Albatal, H. Joho, and K. Ishii. A privacy by design approach to lifelogging. In Digital enlightenment yearbook 2014, pp. 49-73. IOS Press, 2014.
  14. C. Gurrin, A. F. Smeaton, A. R. Doherty, et al. Lifelogging: Personal big data. Foundations and Trends® in information retrieval, 8(1):1- 125, 2014.
  15. C. Gurrin, A. F. Smeaton, Z. Qiu, and A. R. Doherty. Exploring the technical challenges of large-scale lifelogging. ACM Transactions on Intelligent Systems and Technology, 2013.
  16. G. R. Hayes, S. N. Patel, K. N. Truong, G. Iachello, J. A. Kientz, R. Farmer, and G. D. Abowd. The personal audio loop: Designing a ubiquitous audio-based memory aid. In Mobile Human-Computer Interaction-MobileHCI 2004: 6th International Symposium, Mobile- HCI, Glasgow, UK, September 13-16, 2004. Proceedings 6, pp. 168- 179. Springer, 2004.
  17. S. Hodges, L. Williams, E. Berry, S. Izadi, J. Srinivasan, A. Butler, G. Smyth, N. Kapur, and K. Wood. Sensecam: A retrospective memory aid. In UbiComp 2006: Ubiquitous Computing: 8th International Conference, UbiComp 2006 Orange County, CA, USA, September 17-21, 2006 Proceedings 8, pp. 177-193. Springer, 2006.
  18. M. J. Intons-Peterson. External memory aids and their relation to memory. In Cognitive psychology applied, pp. 145-168. Psychology Press, 2014.
  19. M. J. Intons-Peterson and G. L. Newsome III. External memory aids: Effects and effectiveness. In Memory improvement: Implications for memory theory, pp. 101-121. Springer, 1992.
  20. B. F. Katz, F. Dramas, G. Parseihian, O. Gutierrez, S. Kammoun, A. Brilhault, L. Brunet, M. Gallay, B. Oriola, M. Auvray, et al. Navig: Guidance system for the visually impaired using virtual augmented reality. Technology and Disability, 24(2):163-178, 2012.
  21. S. B. Klein. What memory is. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cogni- tive Science, 6(1):1-38, 2015.
  22. R. Krishna, K. Hata, F. Ren, L. Fei-Fei, and J. Carlos Niebles. Dense- captioning events in videos. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV), 2017.
  23. H. Le, T. Tran, and S. Venkatesh. Self-attentive associative memory. In International Conference on Machine Learning, pp. 5682-5691. PMLR, 2020.
  24. H. V. Le, S. Clinch, C. Sas, T. Dingler, N. Henze, and N. Davies. Impact of video summary viewing on episodic memory recall -design guidelines for video summarizations. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 4793-4805. ACM, 2016.
  25. T. Le, H. Nguyen, L. Duan, D. Q. Pham, and M. L. Shyu. Hierarchical conditional relation networks for video question answering. In Pro- ceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 2020.
  26. J. Lei, L. Yu, T. Berg, and M. Bansal. Tvqa+: Spatio-temporal ground- ing for video question answering. In Proceedings of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL), pp. 8211-8225, 2020.
  27. C.-Y. Lin. Rouge: A package for automatic evaluation of summaries. In Text Summarization Branches Out, pp. 74-81. Association for Com- putational Linguistics, 2004.
  28. H. Liu, C. Li, Q. Wu, and Y. J. Lee. Visual instruction tuning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.08485, 2023. · arXiv
  29. A. Lo Valvo, D. Croce, D. Garlisi, F. Giuliano, L. Giarré, and I. Tin- nirello. A navigation and augmented reality system for visually im- paired people. Sensors, 21(9):3061, 2021.
  30. P. Milgram and F. Kishino. A taxonomy of mixed reality visual displays. IEICE TRANSACTIONS on Information and Systems, 77(12):1321- 1329, 1994.
  31. T. Miyanishi and M. Kawanabe. Watch, listen, and answer: Open- ended videoqa with modulated multi-stream 3d convnets. In European Signal Processing Conference (EUSIPCO), pp. 706-710, 2021.
  32. J. Mun, P. H. Seo, I. Jung, and B. Han. Just ask: An interactive learning framework for vision and language navigation. In Proceedings of the European Conference on Computer Vision (ECCV), 2020.
  33. K. Papineni, S. Roukos, T. Ward, and W.-J. Zhu. Bleu: a method for automatic evaluation of machine translation. In Proceedings of the 40th annual meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 311-318, 2002.
  34. M. Post. A call for clarity in reporting BLEU scores. In Proceedings of the Third Conference on Machine Translation: Research Papers, pp. 186-191. Association for Computational Linguistics, Belgium, Brussels, Oct. 2018. doi: 10.18653/v1/W18-6319 · DOI · Paper page
  35. J. W. Rae, A. Potapenko, S. M. Jayakumar, and T. P. Lillicrap. Compres- sive transformers for long-range sequence modelling. arXiv preprint arXiv:1911.05507, 2019. · arXiv
  36. M. Regneri, M. Rohrbach, D. Wetzel, S. Thater, B. Schiele, and M. Pinkal. Grounding action descriptions in videos. Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics, 1:25-36, 2013.
  37. K. Rivera-Lares, R. Logie, A. Baddeley, et al. Rate of forgetting is independent of initial degree of learning. Memory & Cognition, 50:1706-1718, 2022. doi: 10.3758/s13421-021-01271-1 · DOI
  38. O. Rosello, M. Exposito, and P. Maes. Nevermind: Using augmented reality for memorization. In Adjunct Proceedings of the 29th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology, pp. 215- 216, 2016.
  39. G. Sun, L. Liang, T. Li, B. Yu, M. Wu, and B. Zhang. Video question answering: A survey of models and datasets. Mobile Networks and Applications, 26(5):1904-1937, 2021.
  40. N. D. Troncoso Aldas, S. Lee, C. Lee, M. B. Rosson, J. M. Carroll, and V. Narayanan. Aiguide: An augmented reality hand guidance application for people with visual impairments. In Proceedings of the 22nd International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility, pp. 1-13, 2020.
  41. J. Wang, Z. Yang, X. Hu, L. Li, K. Lin, Z. Gan, Z. Liu, C. Liu, and L. Wang. Git: A generative image-to-text transformer for vision and language. arXiv preprint arXiv:2205.14100, 2022. · arXiv
  42. K. Wolf, A. Schmidt, A. Bexheti, and M. Langheinrich. Lifelogging: You're wearing a camera? IEEE Pervasive Computing, 13(3):8-12, 2014.
  43. H. Xu, Q. Ye, M. Yan, Y. Shi, J. Ye, Y. Xu, C. Li, B. Bi, Q. Qian, W. Wang, et al. mplug-2: A modularized multi-modal foundation model across text, image and video. arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.00402, 2023. · arXiv
  44. J. Xu, T. Mei, T. Yao, and Y. Rui. Msr-vtt: A large video description dataset for bridging video and language. In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pp. 5288-5296, 2016.
  45. Z. Zhang, C. Zhou, J. Ma, Z. Lin, J. Zhou, H. Yang, and Z. Zhao. Learning to rehearse in long sequence memorization. pp. 12663-12673. PMLR, 2021.
  46. D. Zhu, J. Chen, X. Shen, X. Li, and M. Elhoseiny. Minigpt-4: En- hancing vision-language understanding with advanced large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.10592, 2023. · arXiv

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Shen, J., Dudley, J., & Kristensson, P. O.
Affiliations
University of Cambridge (GB)
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2023
Pages
923-931
ISSN
1554-7868 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4406266298
Cited by
10
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 5
FWCI
2.06
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Proceedings - International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality, ISMAR (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Multimodal Machine Learning Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Information Retrieval and Search Behavior
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
Keywords
memory enhancement, egocentric video, lifelogging, augmented reality head-mounted displays, video retrieval, vector databases, vision-language models, large language models, episodic memory, user study, user acceptance

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