1,721,158 research outputs found
NEURAL NETWORK ANALYSIS OF COMPLEX SCIENTIFIC DATA: ASTRONOMY AND GEOSCIENCES
No full textNEURAL NETWORKS SPECIAL ISSU
Special issue of the journal Neural Networks: complex problem solving in astrophysics and geosciences
No full textA comparison of deep learning models for end-to-end face-based video retrieval in unconstrained videos
No full textFace-based video retrieval (FBVR) is the task of retrieving videos that containing the same face shown in the query image. In this article, we present the first end-to-end FBVR pipeline that is able to operate on large datasets of unconstrained, multi-shot, multi-person videos. We adapt an existing audiovisual recognition dataset to the task of FBVR and use it to evaluate our proposed pipeline. We compare a number of deep learning models for shot detection, face detection, and face feature extraction as part of our pipeline on a validation dataset made of more than 4000 videos. We obtain 97.25% mean average precision on an independent test set, composed of more than 1000 videos. The pipeline is able to extract features from videos at ∼ 7 times the real-time speed, and it is able to perform a query on thousands of videos in less than 0.5 s
Special issue of the journal Neural Networks: complex problem solving in astrophysics and geosciences
No full text
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Full text linkThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
- …
