Video

Subterms

    Latest story

    200 Shares159 Views

    Looking for a specific action in a video? This AI-based method can find it for you

    by

    The internet is awash in instructional videos that can teach curious viewers everything from cooking the perfect pancake to performing a life-saving Heimlich maneuver.But pinpointing when and where a particular action happens in a long video can be tedious. To streamline the process, scientists are trying to teach computers to perform this task. Ideally, a user could just describe the action they’re looking for, and an AI model would skip to its location in the video.However, teaching machine-learning models to do this usually requires a great deal of expensive video data that have been painstakingly hand-labeled.A new, more efficient approach from researchers at MIT and the MIT-IBM Watson AI Lab trains a model to perform this task, known as spatio-temporal grounding, using only videos and their automatically generated transcripts.The researchers teach a model to understand an unlabeled video in two distinct ways: by looking at small details to figure out where objects are located (spatial information) and looking at the bigger picture to understand when the action occurs (temporal information).Compared to other AI approaches, their method more accurately identifies actions in longer videos with multiple activities. Interestingly, they found that simultaneously training on spatial and temporal information makes a model better at identifying each individually.In addition to streamlining online learning and virtual training processes, this technique could also be useful in health care settings by rapidly finding key moments in videos of diagnostic procedures, for example.“We disentangle the challenge of trying to encode spatial and temporal information all at once and instead think about it like two experts working on their own, which turns out to be a more explicit way to encode the information. Our model, which combines these two separate branches, leads to the best performance,” says Brian Chen, lead author of a paper on this technique.Chen, a 2023 graduate of Columbia University who conducted this research while a visiting student at the MIT-IBM Watson AI Lab, is joined on the paper by James Glass, senior research scientist, member of the MIT-IBM Watson AI Lab, and head of the Spoken Language Systems Group in the Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory (CSAIL); Hilde Kuehne, a member of the MIT-IBM Watson AI Lab who is also affiliated with Goethe University Frankfurt; and others at MIT, Goethe University, the MIT-IBM Watson AI Lab, and Quality Match GmbH. The research will be presented at the Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition.Global and local learningResearchers usually teach models to perform spatio-temporal grounding using videos in which humans have annotated the start and end times of particular tasks.Not only is generating these data expensive, but it can be difficult for humans to figure out exactly what to label. If the action is “cooking a pancake,” does that action start when the chef begins mixing the batter or when she pours it into the pan?“This time, the task may be about cooking, but next time, it might be about fixing a car. There are so many different domains for people to annotate. But if we can learn everything without labels, it is a more general solution,” Chen says.For their approach, the researchers use unlabeled instructional videos and accompanying text transcripts from a website like YouTube as training data. These don’t need any special preparation.They split the training process into two pieces. For one, they teach a machine-learning model to look at the entire video to understand what actions happen at certain times. This high-level information is called a global representation.For the second, they teach the model to focus on a specific region in parts of the video where action is happening. In a large kitchen, for instance, the model might only need to focus on the wooden spoon a chef is using to mix pancake batter, rather than the entire counter. This fine-grained information is called a local representation.The researchers incorporate an additional component into their framework to mitigate misalignments that occur between narration and video. Perhaps the chef talks about cooking the pancake first and performs the action later.To develop a more realistic solution, the researchers focused on uncut videos that are several minutes long. In contrast, most AI techniques train using few-second clips that someone trimmed to show only one action.A new benchmarkBut when they came to evaluate their approach, the researchers couldn’t find an effective benchmark for testing a model on these longer, uncut videos — so they created one.To build their benchmark dataset, the researchers devised a new annotation technique that works well for identifying multistep actions. They had users mark the intersection of objects, like the point where a knife edge cuts a tomato, rather than drawing a box around important objects.“This is more clearly defined and speeds up the annotation process, which reduces the human labor and cost,” Chen says.Plus, having multiple people do point annotation on the same video can better capture actions that occur over time, like the flow of milk being poured. All annotators won’t mark the exact same point in the flow of liquid.When they used this benchmark to test their approach, the researchers found that it was more accurate at pinpointing actions than other AI techniques.Their method was also better at focusing on human-object interactions. For instance, if the action is “serving a pancake,” many other approaches might focus only on key objects, like a stack of pancakes sitting on a counter. Instead, their method focuses on the actual moment when the chef flips a pancake onto a plate.Next, the researchers plan to enhance their approach so models can automatically detect when text and narration are not aligned, and switch focus from one modality to the other. They also want to extend their framework to audio data, since there are usually strong correlations between actions and the sounds objects make.“AI research has made incredible progress towards creating models like ChatGPT that understand images. But our progress on understanding video is far behind. This work represents a significant step forward in that direction,” says Kate Saenko, a professor in the Department of Computer Science at Boston University who was not involved with this work.This research is funded, in part, by the MIT-IBM Watson AI Lab. More

    More stories

    • 138 Shares189 Views

      in Data Management & Statistics

      Artificial intelligence system learns concepts shared across video, audio, and text

      by

      Humans observe the world through a combination of different modalities, like vision, hearing, and our understanding of language. Machines, on the other hand, interpret the world through data that algorithms can process.

      So, when a machine “sees” a photo, it must encode that photo into data it can use to perform a task like image classification. This process becomes more complicated when inputs come in multiple formats, like videos, audio clips, and images.

      “The main challenge here is, how can a machine align those different modalities? As humans, this is easy for us. We see a car and then hear the sound of a car driving by, and we know these are the same thing. But for machine learning, it is not that straightforward,” says Alexander Liu, a graduate student in the Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory (CSAIL) and first author of a paper tackling this problem. 

      Liu and his collaborators developed an artificial intelligence technique that learns to represent data in a way that captures concepts which are shared between visual and audio modalities. For instance, their method can learn that the action of a baby crying in a video is related to the spoken word “crying” in an audio clip.

      Using this knowledge, their machine-learning model can identify where a certain action is taking place in a video and label it.

      It performs better than other machine-learning methods at cross-modal retrieval tasks, which involve finding a piece of data, like a video, that matches a user’s query given in another form, like spoken language. Their model also makes it easier for users to see why the machine thinks the video it retrieved matches their query.

      This technique could someday be utilized to help robots learn about concepts in the world through perception, more like the way humans do.

      Joining Liu on the paper are CSAIL postdoc SouYoung Jin; grad students Cheng-I Jeff Lai and Andrew Rouditchenko; Aude Oliva, senior research scientist in CSAIL and MIT director of the MIT-IBM Watson AI Lab; and senior author James Glass, senior research scientist and head of the Spoken Language Systems Group in CSAIL. The research will be presented at the Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics.

      Learning representations

      The researchers focus their work on representation learning, which is a form of machine learning that seeks to transform input data to make it easier to perform a task like classification or prediction.

      The representation learning model takes raw data, such as videos and their corresponding text captions, and encodes them by extracting features, or observations about objects and actions in the video. Then it maps those data points in a grid, known as an embedding space. The model clusters similar data together as single points in the grid. Each of these data points, or vectors, is represented by an individual word.

      For instance, a video clip of a person juggling might be mapped to a vector labeled “juggling.”

      The researchers constrain the model so it can only use 1,000 words to label vectors. The model can decide which actions or concepts it wants to encode into a single vector, but it can only use 1,000 vectors. The model chooses the words it thinks best represent the data.

      Rather than encoding data from different modalities onto separate grids, their method employs a shared embedding space where two modalities can be encoded together. This enables the model to learn the relationship between representations from two modalities, like video that shows a person juggling and an audio recording of someone saying “juggling.”

      To help the system process data from multiple modalities, they designed an algorithm that guides the machine to encode similar concepts into the same vector.

      “If there is a video about pigs, the model might assign the word ‘pig’ to one of the 1,000 vectors. Then if the model hears someone saying the word ‘pig’ in an audio clip, it should still use the same vector to encode that,” Liu explains.

      A better retriever

      They tested the model on cross-modal retrieval tasks using three datasets: a video-text dataset with video clips and text captions, a video-audio dataset with video clips and spoken audio captions, and an image-audio dataset with images and spoken audio captions.

      For example, in the video-audio dataset, the model chose 1,000 words to represent the actions in the videos. Then, when the researchers fed it audio queries, the model tried to find the clip that best matched those spoken words.

      “Just like a Google search, you type in some text and the machine tries to tell you the most relevant things you are searching for. Only we do this in the vector space,” Liu says.

      Not only was their technique more likely to find better matches than the models they compared it to, it is also easier to understand.

      Because the model could only use 1,000 total words to label vectors, a user can more see easily which words the machine used to conclude that the video and spoken words are similar. This could make the model easier to apply in real-world situations where it is vital that users understand how it makes decisions, Liu says.

      The model still has some limitations they hope to address in future work. For one, their research focused on data from two modalities at a time, but in the real world humans encounter many data modalities simultaneously, Liu says.

      “And we know 1,000 words works on this kind of dataset, but we don’t know if it can be generalized to a real-world problem,” he adds.

      Plus, the images and videos in their datasets contained simple objects or straightforward actions; real-world data are much messier. They also want to determine how well their method scales up when there is a wider diversity of inputs.

      This research was supported, in part, by the MIT-IBM Watson AI Lab and its member companies, Nexplore and Woodside, and by the MIT Lincoln Laboratory. More

    • 88 Shares119 Views

      in Data Management & Statistics

      Security tool guarantees privacy in surveillance footage

      by

      Surveillance cameras have an identity problem, fueled by an inherent tension between utility and privacy. As these powerful little devices have cropped up seemingly everywhere, the use of machine learning tools has automated video content analysis at a massive scale — but with increasing mass surveillance, there are currently no legally enforceable rules to limit privacy invasions. 

      Security cameras can do a lot — they’ve become smarter and supremely more competent than their ghosts of grainy pictures past, the ofttimes “hero tool” in crime media. (“See that little blurry blue blob in the right hand corner of that densely populated corner — we got him!”) Now, video surveillance can help health officials measure the fraction of people wearing masks, enable transportation departments to monitor the density and flow of vehicles, bikes, and pedestrians, and provide businesses with a better understanding of shopping behaviors. But why has privacy remained a weak afterthought? 

      The status quo is to retrofit video with blurred faces or black boxes. Not only does this prevent analysts from asking some genuine queries (e.g., Are people wearing masks?), it also doesn’t always work; the system may miss some faces and leave them unblurred for the world to see. Dissatisfied with this status quo, researchers from MIT’s Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory (CSAIL), in collaboration with other institutions, came up with a system to better guarantee privacy in video footage from surveillance cameras. Called “Privid,” the system lets analysts submit video data queries, and adds a little bit of noise (extra data) to the end result to ensure that an individual can’t be identified. The system builds on a formal definition of privacy — “differential privacy” — which allows access to aggregate statistics about private data without revealing personally identifiable information.

      Typically, analysts would just have access to the entire video to do whatever they want with it, but Privid makes sure the video isn’t a free buffet. Honest analysts can get access to the information they need, but that access is restrictive enough that malicious analysts can’t do too much with it. To enable this, rather than running the code over the entire video in one shot, Privid breaks the video into small pieces and runs processing code over each chunk. Instead of getting results back from each piece, the segments are aggregated, and that additional noise is added. (There’s also information on the error bound you’re going to get on your result — maybe a 2 percent error margin, given the extra noisy data added). 

      For example, the code might output the number of people observed in each video chunk, and the aggregation might be the “sum,” to count the total number of people wearing face coverings, or the “average” to estimate the density of crowds. 

      Privid allows analysts to use their own deep neural networks that are commonplace for video analytics today. This gives analysts the flexibility to ask questions that the designers of Privid did not anticipate. Across a variety of videos and queries, Privid was accurate within 79 to 99 percent of a non-private system.

      “We’re at a stage right now where cameras are practically ubiquitous. If there’s a camera on every street corner, every place you go, and if someone could actually process all of those videos in aggregate, you can imagine that entity building a very precise timeline of when and where a person has gone,” says MIT CSAIL PhD student ​​Frank Cangialosi, the lead author on a paper about Privid. “People are already worried about location privacy with GPS — video data in aggregate could capture not only your location history, but also moods, behaviors, and more at each location.” 

      Privid introduces a new notion of “duration-based privacy,” which decouples the definition of privacy from its enforcement — with obfuscation, if your privacy goal is to protect all people, the enforcement mechanism needs to do some work to find the people to protect, which it may or may not do perfectly. With this mechanism, you don’t need to fully specify everything, and you’re not hiding more information than you need to. 

      Let’s say we have a video overlooking a street. Two analysts, Alice and Bob, both claim they want to count the number of people that pass by each hour, so they submit a video processing module and ask for a sum aggregation.

      The first analyst is the city planning department, which hopes to use this information to understand footfall patterns and plan sidewalks for the city. Their model counts people and outputs this count for each video chunk.

      The other analyst is malicious. They hope to identify every time “Charlie” passes by the camera. Their model only looks for Charlie’s face, and outputs a large number if Charlie is present (i.e., the “signal” they’re trying to extract), or zero otherwise. Their hope is that the sum will be non-zero if Charlie was present. 

      From Privid’s perspective, these two queries look identical. It’s hard to reliably determine what their models might be doing internally, or what the analyst hopes to use the data for. This is where the noise comes in. Privid executes both of the queries, and adds the same amount of noise for each. In the first case, because Alice was counting all people, this noise will only have a small impact on the result, but likely won’t impact the usefulness. 

      In the second case, since Bob was looking for a specific signal (Charlie was only visible for a few chunks), the noise is enough to prevent them from knowing if Charlie was there or not. If they see a non-zero result, it might be because Charlie was actually there, or because the model outputs “zero,” but the noise made it non-zero. Privid didn’t need to know anything about when or where Charlie appeared, the system just needed to know a rough upper bound on how long Charlie might appear for, which is easier to specify than figuring out the exact locations, which prior methods rely on. 

      The challenge is determining how much noise to add — Privid wants to add just enough to hide everyone, but not so much that it would be useless for analysts. Adding noise to the data and insisting on queries over time windows means that your result isn’t going to be as accurate as it could be, but the results are still useful while providing better privacy. 

      Cangialosi wrote the paper with Princeton PhD student Neil Agarwal, MIT CSAIL PhD student Venkat Arun, assistant professor at the University of Chicago Junchen Jiang, assistant professor at Rutgers University and former MIT CSAIL postdoc Srinivas Narayana, associate professor at Rutgers University Anand Sarwate, and assistant professor at Princeton University and Ravi Netravali SM ’15, PhD ’18. Cangialosi will present the paper at the USENIX Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation Conference in April in Renton, Washington. 

      This work was partially supported by a Sloan Research Fellowship and National Science Foundation grants. More