Skip to content
Back to the collection

Long-term Recurrent Convolutional Networks for Visual Recognition and Description

Jeff Donahue, Lisa Anne Hendricks, Marcus Rohrbach

Show all 7 authors

Subhashini Venugopalan, Sergio Guadarrama, Kate Saenko, Trevor Darrell

2014 · arXiv

Read the paper
HN score
0
Mentions
3
Readers
3
Months
3
What’s in a score?

From the abstract

Models based on deep convolutional networks have dominated recent image interpretation tasks; we investigate whether models which are also recurrent, or "temporally deep", are effective for tasks involving sequences, visual and otherwise. We develop a novel recurrent convolutional architecture suitable for large-scale visual learning which is end-to-end trainable, and demonstrate the value of these models on benchmark video recognition tasks, image description and retrieval problems, and video narration challenges. In contrast to current models which assume a fixed spatio-temporal receptive field or simple temporal averaging for sequential processing, recurrent convolutional models are "doubly deep"' in that they can be compositional in spatial and temporal "layers". Such models may have advantages when target concepts are complex and/or training data are limited. Learning long-term dependencies is possible when nonlinearities are incorporated into the network state updates. Long-term RNN models are appealing in that they directly can map variable-length inputs (e.g., video frames) to variable length outputs (e.g., natural language text) and can model complex temporal dynamics; yet they can be optimized with backpropagation. Our recurrent long-term models are directly connected to modern visual convnet models and can be jointly trained to simultaneously learn temporal dynamics and convolutional perceptual representations. Our results show such models have distinct advantages over state-of-the-art models for recognition or generation which are separately defined and/or optimized.

Metadata: arXiv. Abstracts retain their original authors’ rights.

In the conversation

Original HN comments, with labels from simple text rules. A label describes the whole comment and may miss context or irony. Read the discussion to make up your own mind. About the labels

3 selected excerpts · 3 total mentions

DeonPenny
Neutral mention · rule
1. You can get 89% accuracy with a convolutional LSTM https://arxiv.org/pdf/1411.4389.pdf 2. You get multiple bites of the apple the chip is processing 200 images a second. It had plenty of sign in the next frame to identify an issue. 3. All Tesla have redundant side sensors and radars, and an adversarial system for checking it's conclusions. 4. Having don't actually need to file those things in Tesla case. Why would you? They could easily test the functionality and tell no one and not worry about the regulation until they've passed a certain amount of accuracy. 5. The beta is navigation on autopilot and it's proven to be safer than regular drivers by far. And most…
Read the full comment
importantly what do you think will happen if elon release. Self driving on local roads in a year. Other than that what more would the car need to do. Be able to do that without people touching the wheel. If he just release that as a "feature" and it works there won't be a marketing issue. In fact he already has.
zan2434
Neutral mention · rule
>Perhaps a neural network can tell what a cat looks like, but can it tell the difference between a dead cat and a sleeping one, by watching it breathe? Yes, yes it can: http://arxiv.org/abs/1411.4389 (Long-term Recurrent Convolutional Networks for Visual Recognition and Description) It's certainly surprising how much of perception can be reduced to classification.
karpathy
Neutral mention · rule
Hi all, I'm the author on the Stanford article, so I can answer any more detailed/technical questions. The article doesn't mention this, but closely related work I've only very recently become aware of (if anyone is interested) are additionally: From UofT: http://arxiv.org/pdf/1411.2539v1.pdf From Baidu/UCLA: http://arxiv.org/pdf/1410.1090v1.pdf From Google: http://googleresearch.blogspot.com/2014/11/a-picture-is-wort... From Stanford (our work): http://cs.stanford.edu/people/karpathy/deepimagesent/ Edit: And seemingly also from Berkeley http://arxiv.org/pdf/1411.4389v1.pdf At least from my perspective, the main motivation behind this work is in thinking of natural…
Read the full comment
language as a rich label space. As humans, we've very successfully used language for communication and knowledge representation, and I think our algorithms should do the same. This also enables much more straightforward I/O interactions between a human and machine because humans speak text fluently. They don't speak a set of arbitrarily devised and assigned labels. So the hope is that in the future you can, for example, search your photos based on text queries, or ask the computer questions about images, and get answers back in natural language. There's a lot of exciting work to be done!

Keep following the thread.

More in Computer vision

More from the same topics.

2018arXiv

Talent vs Luck: the role of randomness in success and failure

A. Pluchino. A. E. Biondo, A. Rapisarda

The largely dominant meritocratic paradigm of highly competitive Western cultures is rooted on the belief that success is due mainly, if not exclusively, to personal qualities such as talent, intelligence, skills, efforts or risk taking.

16 mentions14 months
2.5HN score