Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 71 references

PiercingEye: Dual-Space Video Violence Detection with Hyperbolic Vision-Language Guidance

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read The paper claims that dual-space representation with LLM-generated ambiguous text supervision reaches state-of-the-art violence detection on XD-Violence and a curated ambiguous subset of UCF-Crime.

desk verdict Real but incremental dual-space violence detection; the headline numbers look plausible, but the core cross-space Lorentzian attention is undefined as written. read the letter →

arxiv 2504.18866 v1 pith:TPZTAPBV submitted 2025-04-26 cs.CV

Jiaxu Leng , Zhanjie Wu , Mingpi Tan , Mengjingcheng Mo , Jiankang Zheng , Qingqing Li , Ji Gan , Xinbo Gao This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CV
keywords videoviolencedetectionweaklysupervisedlearninghyperbolicrepresentationdual-spaceambiguouseventvision-languagealignmentlargelanguagemodelsLorentzianmetric
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

PiercingEye tries to show that weakly supervised video violence detection fails mainly on ambiguous events—visually similar moments that mean different things, like a hockey fight versus legal body checking—and that this failure can be fixed by learning in two geometries at once. It combines a Euclidean stream that preserves visual appearance and motion with a hyperbolic stream that captures the hierarchy of event categories and temporal context, then fuses the two with Lorentzian cross-space attention. To supply scarce supervision for ambiguity, it uses a vision-language model and a large language model to generate text descriptions that change the scene or the action while staying visually plausible, and trains with a hyperbolic contrastive loss that weights the hardest confusing negatives most heavily. The paper reports state-of-the-art frame-level average precision on XD-Violence (88.82% multimodal, 83.74% unimodal), a comparable 86.64% AUC on UCF-Crime, and a gain over the authors' earlier dual-space model on a 13-video ambiguous subset. If true, this amounts to a recipe for detecting violence where appearance alone cannot decide.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the Lorentz model of hyperbolic space, a constant-negative-curvature manifold on which hierarchical event structure can be encoded in distances. Three mechanisms use it. HE-GCN maps snippet features onto the hyperboloid, computes Lorentzian similarities $L_s(x_i,x_j)=\exp(-d^K_L(x_i,x_j))$ between nodes, and prunes the message-passing graph with a layer-sensitive threshold built from the hyperbolic Dirichlet energy. DSI treats Euclidean and hyperbolic features as query/key/value sets and applies the same Lorentzian similarity in cross-space attention, so appearance and motion from Euclidean space can interact with event hierarchy from hyperbolic space. AETG modifies VLM-generated captions by changing the scene or the action to create visually similar but semantically distinct text, and HVLGL projects those texts onto the hyperboloid and applies a contrastive loss with negative weights $w_j=\exp(-\theta L_s(T^+,T^-_j))$ that emphasize confusing cases. The ablations tie the reported gains to these components: removing HE-GCN, DSI, or HVLGL lowers AP, and replacing the Lorentzian metric with cosine similarity costs about 2% AP.

What would settle it

Run the same training and evaluation with the cross-space attention changed so that the Euclidean query is first projected onto the hyperboloid with the paper's own exponential map before the Lorentzian similarity is computed; if the XD-Violence AP stays at the reported 88.82% multimodal and 83.74% unimodal and the gap over cosine similarity from Table 6 disappears, then the claimed Lorentzian advantage is not what resolves ambiguity.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that Euclidean and hyperbolic representations are complementary for event understanding, and that language-generated ambiguity can be turned into a trainable signal. In concrete terms, PiercingEye asserts that modeling events on a hyperboloid with a layer-sensitive graph, exchanging information across spaces through Lorentzian attention, and aligning video features to LLM-generated ambiguous text descriptions improves fine-grained discrimination. The reported numbers are 88.82% AP on XD-Violence with audio-visual input and 83.74% with video-only input, both above the listed previous methods; 86.64% AUC on UCF-Crime; and 83.21% AUC versus 82.34% for DSRL on a manually curated subset of 13 visually ambiguous UCF-Crime videos. The paper also argues that the hyperbolic text guidance is what pushes the ambiguous-event performance up: removing it drops multimodal AP by 1.21% and unimodal AP by 1.73% in the ablations.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing assumption is that a Lorentzian distance, which is only defined for points on the hyperboloid, is applied to an ordinary Euclidean-space vector and a hyperbolic-space vector without the paper specifying how the Euclidean vector is moved onto the hyperboloid first, so the fusion mechanism's correctness depends on an operation that is not defined in the text.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the reported XD-Violence numbers hold, audio-visual violence detection can be improved without bigger datasets or extra inference parameters, because the text generation and the HVLGL loss are used only during training.
  • If the ambiguous-subset result holds, LLM/VLM-generated hard-negative text can stand in for scarce real ambiguous footage in weakly supervised video tasks, which matters for other safety-critical recognition problems.
  • If the geometry claim is right, Euclidean-only or hyperbolic-only feature learning is a real bottleneck for fine-grained event recognition, and dual-space fusion is a generally applicable design rather than a violence-specific trick.
  • A direct corollary of the ablations is that the Lorentzian metric itself, not just the extra text data, carries much of the gain: replacing it with cosine similarity in DSI drops AP by about 2% in both unimodal and multimodal settings.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • A natural extension the paper does not test: the AETG scene/action perturbation recipe could generate hard negatives for other fine-grained video tasks such as action recognition or anomaly explanation, effectively using LLM text as data augmentation for semantic ambiguity.
  • Because the hyperbolic contrastive loss outperforms a Euclidean InfoNCE-style loss even before the text-weighting is added, one testable prediction is that the same dual-space plus hyperbolic-text recipe will help open-vocabulary anomaly detection, where the text vocabulary at test time is unknown.
  • The ambiguous-event subset contains only 13 videos, so the 0.87-point AUC gap over DSRL, while consistent with the method's motivation, should be checked on a larger curated set before treating it as a robust property; the authors' own future-work section acknowledges the scarcity of ambiguous samples.
  • One could also combine the dynamic text-similarity weighting with a curriculum schedule in Euclidean CLIP-style losses; if the gain comes from weighting rather than hyperbolic geometry, the same weighting should reproduce part of the HVLGL improvement.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. This paper presents PiercingEye, a weakly supervised video violence detection framework that combines Euclidean and hyperbolic representations. The method consists of four modules: a hyperbolic energy-constrained GCN (HE-GCN) with layer-sensitive hyperbolic association degrees, a dual-space interaction (DSI) module using Lorentzian cross-space attention, an ambiguous event text generation (AETG) module that uses a VLM and LLM to produce scene- or action-edited text descriptions, and a hyperbolic vision-language guided loss (HVLGL) with text-similarity-based weighting of hard negatives. Experiments on XD-Violence report state-of-the-art AP of 88.82% (multimodal) and 83.74% (unimodal), and on a self-curated 13-video ambiguous subset of UCF-Crime the method reports 83.21% AUC versus 82.34% for DSRL. The ablation studies isolate each component, and the paper explicitly discloses that the HE-GCN and DSI modules originate from the authors' prior DSRL work.

Significance. If the technical details are made precise and the evaluation protocol strengthened, the paper's central idea—jointly modeling visual features in Euclidean space and event hierarchies in hyperbolic space, with LLM-generated ambiguous text as auxiliary supervision—is a meaningful contribution to weakly supervised video violence detection. The paper is honest about the provenance of the core dual-space modules and provides a thorough set of ablations, including comparisons of distance metrics, message-passing strategies, and contrastive losses. It also reports model complexity and speed. However, the current manuscript leaves a mathematically central operation undefined: the Lorentzian similarity in the cross-space attention is applied to a Euclidean query without a specified projection onto the hyperboloid. This, together with test-set hyperparameter selection and a very small self-curated benchmark, means the state-of-the-art claim is not yet fully substantiated.

major comments (4)
  1. [Sec. 4.2.2, Eq. (18); Sec. 4.4, Eq. (24)] Lorentzian similarity requires both arguments to lie on the hyperboloid L^n_K, but in Eq. (18) the query V_q is obtained by a linear layer on the Euclidean features V_E while only the key V_k is derived from hyperbolic features; no exponential or logarithmic map is applied to V_q. Similarly, in Eq. (24) the visual feature V is used directly in Ls(V, T^{+,L}) while only the text features are exponentiated in Eq. (23). Because Table 6 attributes 2.03/2.01 AP improvements to replacing cosine similarity with the Lorentzian metric in DSI, this is not a notation issue: the ablations are testing an operation that is undefined as written. The same concern applies to Eq. (28), where VF is a concatenation of Euclidean and hyperbolic branch outputs but is fed into a Lorentzian inner product. Please specify the projection of Euclidean features onto the hyperboloid for DSI, HVLGL, and the classifier, and confirm that the implementation used for Tables 6 and 7 matches the corrected definition.
  2. [Sec. 4.2.1, Eqs. (10)-(11)] The simplification of the hyperbolic Dirichlet energy is mathematically incorrect. With d_i = d_j = n-1, the arguments of the distance in Eq. (10) become exp_o(c log_o x_i) with c = 1/sqrt(n), which are not equal to x_i; because exp_o is nonlinear, the distance between these scaled geodesic points is not d^K_L(x_i, x_j). The simplified form in Eq. (11) therefore does not follow. Since HDE directly determines the LSHAD threshold in Eq. (12), the layer-sensitive node selection claimed in the HE-GCN ablation (Table 5) relies on an ill-defined quantity. Please provide a correct derivation or state the actual HDE variant used in the experiments.
  3. [Sec. 5.3.2-5.3.4] All hyperparameter ablations (β, γ in Fig. 6; λ, α in Fig. 7; τ, θ in Table 8; ψ in Fig. 8) are performed on the XD-Violence test set, and no validation split is described in Section 5.1. Selecting hyperparameters on the test set and then reporting the selected configuration's test performance overstates generalization and makes the SOTA numbers difficult to interpret. Please either introduce a validation split for model selection or report results across multiple seeds with mean and standard deviation so the reader can assess variance. At minimum, state explicitly how the final hyperparameter values were chosen.
  4. [Sec. 5.2, Table 3] The curated ambiguous-event subset of UCF-Crime contains only 13 videos (32,154 frames) and is constructed by first selecting videos that PEL4VAD scores poorly, then asking annotators to confirm ambiguity. On this small, selection-biased set, the reported advantage over DSRL is 0.87 AUC points (83.21 vs. 82.34). As reported, this difference is not shown to be statistically reliable, and the selection procedure is not described in enough detail to rule out bias toward any particular method family. Please provide per-video results, a confidence interval or significance test, and a more transparent selection protocol, or treat the result as a qualitative illustration rather than a benchmark claim.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Throughout] There are several typos: 'pratice' in Section 5.1, 'representated' in Section 4.3.2, 'Lorenzt' in Section 4.2.1, 'mutilmodal seetings' and 'PirecingEye' in the Fig. 6 caption, 'Mutilmodal' in the Fig. 8 caption, and 'T exts' in the Section 5.4.3 heading.
  2. [Sec. 4.2.1, Eq. (12)] The LSHAD definition writes f(E_K^H(x), k) but the right-hand side is explicit; please clarify the role of f and the admissible ranges of β and γ so that the threshold is always in the intended interval.
  3. [Sec. 4.2.2, Eq. (19)] The notation CSAE→H(VH,VE) in Eq. (19) appears inconsistent with the text describing a transfer 'from VE to VH'; please align the argument order and the textual description.
  4. [Fig. 2] Figure 2 is very crowded, and the text labels for the loss module are hard to read; consider enlarging the figure or splitting it into two panels.
  5. [References] Reference [34] is cited as 'NeurIPS24' in Tables 1-3 but appears as an arXiv preprint in the bibliography; please update the citation and the reference entry to the published version.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity found: reused dual-space modules are explicitly attributed to the authors' prior DSRL and independently ablated; headline results are measured on public benchmarks.

full rationale

PiercingEye explicitly discloses its provenance: 'we remind that DSRL consisting of the HE-GCN and DSI modules was first introduced in our previous work [34].' This self-citation is not load-bearing. The present paper independently validates HE-GCN and DSI in Tables 4-6 against GCN-only, HGCN-only, concatenation, and cosine-attention baselines on public XD-Violence data, and the state-of-the-art claims are comparisons on the public XD-Violence and UCF-Crime benchmarks rather than consequences of the cited prior work. The AETG-generated ambiguous texts are pseudo-supervision obtained from the same video frames, but that is a self-supervised training signal, not a derivation in which the predicted quantity is defined as an input; evaluation of the trained model is external. The curated UCF-Crime ambiguous subset is selected via PEL4VAD's low-confidence outputs, which is a selection bias but does not make the reported AUC values equivalent to the selection criterion by construction. The undefined Lorentzian similarity in Eqs. 18 and 24, where a Euclidean query is passed to a distance defined only on the hyperboloid, is an underspecification and correctness risk rather than circularity, because the paper does not define the metric as a function of its own output. No prediction in the paper reduces, by equation or by citation, to its own input.

Assumptions & free parameters 7 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No new physical or ontological entities are introduced. New constructs like LSHAD and hyperbolic Dirichlet energy are mathematical modules within the method, not entities with independent evidence; I do not list them as invented entities.

free parameters (7)
  • beta (LSHAD layer coefficient) = 0.8
    Grid-searched over [0.2, 1.0]; chosen with gamma=1.2 in Section 5.3.2, Fig. 6.
  • gamma (LSHAD bias) = 1.2
    Grid-searched over [1.0, 2.0]; chosen with beta=0.8 in Section 5.3.2, Fig. 6.
  • lambda (DSI attention threshold) = 0.8
    Grid-searched in Section 5.3.3, Fig. 7, optimal at 0.8.
  • alpha (DSI scaling factor) = 0.4
    Grid-searched in Section 5.3.3, Fig. 7, optimal at 0.4.
  • tau (HVLGL temperature) = 0.3
    Grid-searched over [0.03, 0.70]; best at 0.3 in Table 8.
  • theta (HVLGL weighting scaling) = 1.0
    Selected with tau=0.3 from Table 8; the paper notes larger theta helps unimodal but can hurt multimodal.
  • psi (HVLGL loss weight) = 0.0001
    Grid-searched; optimal at 0.0001 in Fig. 8.
assumptions (6)
  • standard math The Lorentz model exponential and logarithmic maps and Lorentzian distance (Eqs. 4-6) are valid.
    Standard hyperbolic geometry tools, cited from [47], [63].
  • domain assumption Hyperbolic spaces naturally encode hierarchical relations among events.
    Core motivation for HE-GCN; assumed in Section 1 and 2.2 without direct evidence in this paper.
  • domain assumption CLIP's text encoder provides a semantic space suitable for aligning video features to text.
    Used in Eq. 23; relies on pretrained CLIP features without fine-tuning on violence text.
  • ad hoc to paper LLM-generated ambiguous texts remain visually plausible and semantically distinct after scene or action edits.
    Central to AETG and HVLGL; the paper provides a few visualizations (Fig. 11) but no automatic quality filter or quantitative verification.
  • domain assumption Global-first perception principle justifies the layer-sensitive threshold schedule in LSHAD.
    Borrowed from [70] to motivate thresholds that start loose and become stricter with layer depth.
  • domain assumption Weakly supervised MIL assumption: video-level labels are sufficient and segments are independent instances.
    Standard VVD setup; used implicitly in the BCE loss.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of PiercingEye: Dual-Space Video Violence Detection with Hyperbolic Vision-Language Guidance." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/TPZTAPBV

@misc{pith2026250418866,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: PiercingEye: Dual-Space Video Violence Detection with Hyperbolic Vision-Language Guidance},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/TPZTAPBV}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2504.18866}
}
read the original abstract

Existing weakly supervised video violence detection (VVD) methods primarily rely on Euclidean representation learning, which often struggles to distinguish visually similar yet semantically distinct events due to limited hierarchical modeling and insufficient ambiguous training samples. To address this challenge, we propose PiercingEye, a novel dual-space learning framework that synergizes Euclidean and hyperbolic geometries to enhance discriminative feature representation. Specifically, PiercingEye introduces a layer-sensitive hyperbolic aggregation strategy with hyperbolic Dirichlet energy constraints to progressively model event hierarchies, and a cross-space attention mechanism to facilitate complementary feature interactions between Euclidean and hyperbolic spaces. Furthermore, to mitigate the scarcity of ambiguous samples, we leverage large language models to generate logic-guided ambiguous event descriptions, enabling explicit supervision through a hyperbolic vision-language contrastive loss that prioritizes high-confusion samples via dynamic similarity-aware weighting. Extensive experiments on XD-Violence and UCF-Crime benchmarks demonstrate that PiercingEye achieves state-of-the-art performance, with particularly strong results on a newly curated ambiguous event subset, validating its superior capability in fine-grained violence detection.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2504.18866 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Overview of the core idea behind the proposed PiercingEye framework. (a) The hierarchical structure of event [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. A conceptual diagram of our PiercingEye. After initial feature extraction by two encoders, visual features are learned [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. An illustration of the proposed HE-GCN. We first ex [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (8 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: A conceptual diagram of our AETG. We first use a“scene analysis followed by behavior analysi” approach to prompt [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Most of them within the subset exhibit strong visual [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Ablation syudies on β and γ. We report the perfor￾mance of the PirecingEye under different HE-GCN setups in both unimodal and mutilmodal seetings. Experiments are conducted on the XD-Violence dataset. (> 0.5), causing the overlook of some global context in￾formation. T…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Performance comparison of XD-Violence dataset un [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Some visual results of PiercingEye in the context of ambiguous violence. The blue curves show violence scores [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: t-SNE visualization of feature distributions for normal (purple) and violent (red) samples under different ablation [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Visualization of Ambiguous Texts Generated by AETG. (a)-(c) are from XD-Violence dataset. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Frame-level scores and violence localization examples for the test video from XD-Violence dataset. (a)–(c) and (d)–(f) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_12.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

71 extracted references · 52 canonical work pages

  1. [34]

    Beyond euclidean: Dual-space represen- tation learning for weakly supervised video violence detection

    Jiaxu Leng, Zhanjie Wu, Mingpi Tan, Yiran Liu, Ji Gan, Haosheng Chen, and Xinbo Gao. Beyond euclidean: Dual-space represen- tation learning for weakly supervised video violence detection. arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.19252, 2024

    arXiv 2024

  2. [1]

    Real-world anomaly detection in surveillance videos

    Waqas Sultani, Chen Chen, and Mubarak Shah. Real-world anomaly detection in surveillance videos. In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition , pages 6479– 6488, 2018

    work page 2018

  3. [2]

    Not only look, but also listen: Learn- ing multimodal violence detection under weak supervision

    Peng Wu, Jing Liu, Yujia Shi, Yujia Sun, Fangtao Shao, Zhaoyang Wu, and Zhiwei Yang. Not only look, but also listen: Learn- ing multimodal violence detection under weak supervision. In Computer Vision–ECCV 2020: 16th European Conference, Glasgow, UK, August 23–28, 2020, Proceedings, Part XXX 16 , pages 322–339. Springer, 2020

    work page 2020

  4. [3]

    Dota: Unsupervised detection of traffic anomaly in driving videos

    Yu Yao, Xizi Wang, Mingze Xu, Zelin Pu, Yuchen Wang, Ella Atkins, and David J Crandall. Dota: Unsupervised detection of traffic anomaly in driving videos. IEEE transactions on pattern analysis and machine intelligence, 45(1):444–459, 2022

    work page 2022

  5. [4]

    Scene-dependent prediction in latent space for video anomaly detection and anticipation

    Congqi Cao, Hanwen Zhang, Yue Lu, Peng Wang, and Yanning Zhang. Scene-dependent prediction in latent space for video anomaly detection and anticipation. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 2024

    work page 2024

  6. [5]

    A new comprehensive benchmark for semi-supervised video anomaly detection and anticipation

    Congqi Cao, Yue Lu, Peng Wang, and Yanning Zhang. A new comprehensive benchmark for semi-supervised video anomaly detection and anticipation. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF confer- ence on computer vision and pattern recognition , pages 20392–20401, 2023

    work page 2023

  7. [6]

    Anomaly warning: Learning and memorizing future semantic patterns for unsupervised ex-ante potential anomaly prediction

    Jiaxu Leng, Mingpi Tan, Xinbo Gao, Wen Lu, and Zongyi Xu. Anomaly warning: Learning and memorizing future semantic patterns for unsupervised ex-ante potential anomaly prediction. In Proceedings of the 30th ACM International Conference on Multimedia , pages 6746–6754, 2022

    work page 2022

  8. [7]

    Future frame prediction network for video anomaly detection

    Weixin Luo, Wen Liu, Dongze Lian, and Shenghua Gao. Future frame prediction network for video anomaly detection. IEEE transactions on pattern analysis and machine intelligence , 44(11):7505– 7520, 2021

    work page 2021

Show all 71 references
  1. [8]

    Learning causal temporal relation and feature discrimination for anomaly detection

    Peng Wu and Jing Liu. Learning causal temporal relation and feature discrimination for anomaly detection. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, 30:3513–3527, 2021

    2021

  2. [9]

    A framework for multiple- instance learning

    Oded Maron and Tom ´as Lozano-P´erez. A framework for multiple- instance learning. Advances in neural information processing systems, 10, 1997

    1997

  3. [10]

    Weakly-supervised video anomaly detection with robust temporal feature magnitude learn- ing

    Yu Tian, Guansong Pang, Yuanhong Chen, Rajvinder Singh, Jo- han W Verjans, and Gustavo Carneiro. Weakly-supervised video anomaly detection with robust temporal feature magnitude learn- ing. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF international conference on computer vision, pages 4975–...

    2021

  4. [11]

    Unbiased multiple instance learning for weakly su- pervised video anomaly detection

    Hui Lv, Zhongqi Yue, Qianru Sun, Bin Luo, Zhen Cui, and Han- wang Zhang. Unbiased multiple instance learning for weakly su- pervised video anomaly detection. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition , pages 8022– 8031, 2023

    2023

  5. [12]

    Dual memory units with uncertainty regulation for weakly supervised video anomaly detection

    Hang Zhou, Junqing Yu, and Wei Yang. Dual memory units with uncertainty regulation for weakly supervised video anomaly detection. In Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelli- gence, volume 37, pages 3769–3777, 2023

    2023

  6. [13]

    Learning prompt-enhanced context features for weakly-supervised video anomaly detection

    Yujiang Pu, Xiaoyu Wu, Lulu Yang, and Shengjin Wang. Learning prompt-enhanced context features for weakly-supervised video anomaly detection. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, 2024

    2024

  7. [14]

    Text prompt with normality guidance for weakly supervised video anomaly detection

    Zhiwei Yang, Jing Liu, and Peng Wu. Text prompt with normality guidance for weakly supervised video anomaly detection. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 18899–18908, 2024

    2024

  8. [15]

    Mist: Multiple instance self-training framework for video anomaly detection

    Jia-Chang Feng, Fa-Ting Hong, and Wei-Shi Zheng. Mist: Multiple instance self-training framework for video anomaly detection. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 14009–14018, 2021

    2021

  9. [16]

    Exploiting complete- ness and uncertainty of pseudo labels for weakly supervised video anomaly detection

    Chen Zhang, Guorong Li, Yuankai Qi, Shuhui Wang, Laiyun Qing, Qingming Huang, and Ming-Hsuan Yang. Exploiting complete- ness and uncertainty of pseudo labels for weakly supervised video anomaly detection. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern...

    2023

  10. [17]

    Self-training multi-sequence learning with transformer for weakly supervised video anomaly detection

    Shuo Li, Fang Liu, and Licheng Jiao. Self-training multi-sequence learning with transformer for weakly supervised video anomaly detection. In Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelli- gence, volume 36, pages 1395–1403, 2022

    2022

  11. [18]

    Modality-aware contrastive instance learning with self-distillation for weakly-supervised audio-visual violence detection

    Jiashuo Yu, Jinyu Liu, Ying Cheng, Rui Feng, and Yuejie Zhang. Modality-aware contrastive instance learning with self-distillation for weakly-supervised audio-visual violence detection. In Proceed- ings of the 30th ACM International Conference on Multimedia , pages 6278–6287, 2022

    2022

  12. [19]

    Modality-free violence detection via cross- modal causal attention and feature distillation

    Jiaxu Leng, Zhanjie Wu, Mengjingcheng Mo, Mingpi Tan, Shuang Li, and Xinbo Gao. Modality-free violence detection via cross- modal causal attention and feature distillation. In 2024 IEEE International Conference on Multimedia and Expo (ICME) , pages 1– 6, 2024

    2024

  13. [20]

    Weakly supervised audio- visual violence detection

    Peng Wu, Xiaotao Liu, and Jing Liu. Weakly supervised audio- visual violence detection. IEEE Transactions on Multimedia , 25:1674–1685, 2023

    2023

  14. [21]

    Violence detection in videos based on fusing visual and audio information

    Wen-Feng Pang, Qian-Hua He, Yong-jian Hu, and Yan-Xiong Li. Violence detection in videos based on fusing visual and audio information. In ICASSP 2021-2021 IEEE international conference on acoustics, speech and signal processing (ICASSP) , pages 2260–2264. IEEE, 2021

    2021

  15. [22]

    Audiovisual dependency attention for violence detection in videos

    Wenfeng Pang, Wei Xie, Qianhua He, Yanxiong Li, and Jichen Yang. Audiovisual dependency attention for violence detection in videos. IEEE Transactions on Multimedia, 2022

    2022

  16. [23]

    Hyperbolic image segmentation

    Mina Ghadimi Atigh, Julian Schoep, Erman Acar, Nanne Van No- ord, and Pascal Mettes. Hyperbolic image segmentation. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 4453–4462, 2022

    2022

  17. [24]

    Skin lesion recognition with class-hierarchy reg- ularized hyperbolic embeddings

    Zhen Yu, Toan Nguyen, Yaniv Gal, Lie Ju, Shekhar S Chandra, Lei Zhang, Paul Bonnington, Victoria Mar, Zhiyong Wang, and Zongyuan Ge. Skin lesion recognition with class-hierarchy reg- ularized hyperbolic embeddings. In International Conference on Medical Image Computing and Com...

    2022

  18. [25]

    Mix dimension in poincar ´e geometry for 3d skeleton-based action recognition

    Wei Peng, Jingang Shi, Zhaoqiang Xia, and Guoying Zhao. Mix dimension in poincar ´e geometry for 3d skeleton-based action recognition. In Proceedings of the 28th ACM International Conference on Multimedia, pages 1432–1440, 2020

    2020

  19. [26]

    Searching for actions on the hyperbole

    Teng Long, Pascal Mettes, Heng Tao Shen, and Cees GM Snoek. Searching for actions on the hyperbole. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , pages 1141–1150, 2020

    2020

  20. [27]

    Curved geometric networks for visual anomaly recognition

    Jie Hong, Pengfei Fang, Weihao Li, Junlin Han, Lars Petersson, and Mehrtash Harandi. Curved geometric networks for visual anomaly recognition. IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems, 2023

    2023

  21. [28]

    Learning weakly supervised audio-visual violence detection in hyperbolic space

    Xiaogang Peng, Hao Wen, Yikai Luo, Xiao Zhou, Keyang Yu, Yigang Wang, and Zizhao Wu. Learning weakly supervised audio-visual violence detection in hyperbolic space. arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.18797, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  22. [29]

    Cross-modal fusion and attention mechanism for weakly supervised video anomaly detection

    Ayush Ghadiya, Purbayan Kar, Vishal Chudasama, and Pankaj Wasnik. Cross-modal fusion and attention mechanism for weakly supervised video anomaly detection. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , pages 1965–1974, 2024

    1965

  23. [30]

    Hyperbolic graph neural networks

    Qi Liu, Maximilian Nickel, and Douwe Kiela. Hyperbolic graph neural networks. Advances in neural information processing systems , 32, 2019

    2019

  24. [31]

    Gpt-4 technical report

    Josh Achiam, Steven Adler, Sandhini Agarwal, Lama Ahmad, Ilge Akkaya, Florencia Leoni Aleman, Diogo Almeida, Janko Al- tenschmidt, Sam Altman, Shyamal Anadkat, et al. Gpt-4 technical report. arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.08774, 2023. 18

    2023 arXiv

  25. [32]

    Exploring the limits of transfer learning with a unified text-to-text transformer

    Colin Raffel, Noam Shazeer, Adam Roberts, Katherine Lee, Sharan Narang, Michael Matena, Yanqi Zhou, Wei Li, and Peter J Liu. Exploring the limits of transfer learning with a unified text-to-text transformer. Journal of machine learning research, 21(140):1–67, 2020

    2020

  26. [33]

    Internvl: Scaling up vision foundation models and aligning for generic visual-linguistic tasks

    Zhe Chen, Jiannan Wu, Wenhai Wang, Weijie Su, Guo Chen, Sen Xing, Muyan Zhong, Qinglong Zhang, Xizhou Zhu, Lewei Lu, et al. Internvl: Scaling up vision foundation models and aligning for generic visual-linguistic tasks. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vis...

    2024

  27. [35]

    Violence detection using oriented violent flows

    Yuan Gao, Hong Liu, Xiaohu Sun, Can Wang, and Yi Liu. Violence detection using oriented violent flows. Image and vision computing, 48:37–41, 2016

    2016

  28. [36]

    A classification method based on optical flow for violence detection

    Javad Mahmoodi and Afsane Salajeghe. A classification method based on optical flow for violence detection. Expert systems with applications, 127:121–127, 2019

    2019

  29. [37]

    Discrimi- native dictionary learning with motion weber local descriptor for violence detection

    Tao Zhang, Wenjing Jia, Xiangjian He, and Jie Yang. Discrimi- native dictionary learning with motion weber local descriptor for violence detection. IEEE transactions on circuits and systems for video technology, 27(3):696–709, 2016

    2016

  30. [38]

    Angry crowds: Detecting violent events in videos

    Sadegh Mohammadi, Alessandro Perina, Hamed Kiani, and Vitto- rio Murino. Angry crowds: Detecting violent events in videos. In Computer Vision–ECCV 2016: 14th European Conference, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, October 11–14, 2016, Proceedings, Part VII 14, pages 3–18. Springer, 2016

    2016

  31. [39]

    Mic-tju at mediaeval violent scenes detection (vsd) 2014

    Bowen Zhang, Yun Yi, Hanli Wang, and Jian Yu. Mic-tju at mediaeval violent scenes detection (vsd) 2014. In MediaEval. Citeseer, 2014

    2014

  32. [40]

    Audio- visual fusion for detecting violent scenes in videos

    Theodoros Giannakopoulos, Alexandros Makris, Dimitrios Kos- mopoulos, Stavros Perantonis, and Sergios Theodoridis. Audio- visual fusion for detecting violent scenes in videos. In Artificial Intelligence: Theories, Models and Applications: 6th Hellenic Conference on AI, SETN 20...

    2010

  33. [41]

    A multimodal approach to violence detection in video sharing sites

    Theodoros Giannakopoulos, Aggelos Pikrakis, and Sergios Theodoridis. A multimodal approach to violence detection in video sharing sites. In 2010 20th International Conference on Pattern Recognition, pages 3244–3247. IEEE, 2010

    2010

  34. [42]

    Video anomaly detection with sparse coding inspired deep neural networks

    Weixin Luo, Wen Liu, Dongze Lian, Jinhui Tang, Lixin Duan, Xi Peng, and Shenghua Gao. Video anomaly detection with sparse coding inspired deep neural networks. IEEE transactions on pattern analysis and machine intelligence, 43(3):1070–1084, 2019

    2019

  35. [43]

    Poincar ´e embeddings for learning hierarchical representations

    Maximillian Nickel and Douwe Kiela. Poincar ´e embeddings for learning hierarchical representations. Advances in neural informa- tion processing systems, 30, 2017

    2017

  36. [44]

    Hyper- bolic neural networks

    Octavian Ganea, Gary B ´ecigneul, and Thomas Hofmann. Hyper- bolic neural networks. Advances in neural information processing systems, 31, 2018

    2018

  37. [45]

    Lorentzian distance learning for hyperbolic representations

    Marc Law, Renjie Liao, Jake Snell, and Richard Zemel. Lorentzian distance learning for hyperbolic representations. In International Conference on Machine Learning, pages 3672–3681. PMLR, 2019

    2019

  38. [46]

    Hyper- bolic neural networks++

    Ryohei Shimizu, Yusuke Mukuta, and Tatsuya Harada. Hyper- bolic neural networks++. arXiv preprint arXiv:2006.08210, 2020

    2006 arXiv

  39. [47]

    Fully hyperbolic neural networks

    Weize Chen, Xu Han, Yankai Lin, Hexu Zhao, Zhiyuan Liu, Peng Li, Maosong Sun, and Jie Zhou. Fully hyperbolic neural networks. arXiv preprint arXiv:2105.14686, 2021

    2021 arXiv

  40. [48]

    Hyperbolic graph attention network

    Yiding Zhang, Xiao Wang, Chuan Shi, Xunqiang Jiang, and Yan- fang Ye. Hyperbolic graph attention network. IEEE Transactions on Big Data, 8(6):1690–1701, 2021

    2021

  41. [49]

    Hyperbolic graph convolutional neural networks

    Ines Chami, Zhitao Ying, Christopher R ´e, and Jure Leskovec. Hyperbolic graph convolutional neural networks. Advances in neural information processing systems, 32, 2019

    2019

  42. [50]

    Constant curvature graph convolutional networks

    Gregor Bachmann, Gary B ´ecigneul, and Octavian Ganea. Constant curvature graph convolutional networks. In International conference on machine learning, pages 486–496. PMLR, 2020

    2020

  43. [51]

    Language models are few-shot learners

    Ben Mann, N Ryder, M Subbiah, J Kaplan, P Dhariwal, A Nee- lakantan, P Shyam, G Sastry, A Askell, S Agarwal, et al. Language models are few-shot learners. arXiv preprint arXiv:2005.14165, 1:3, 2020

    2005 arXiv

  44. [52]

    Llama: Open and efficient foundation language models

    Hugo Touvron, Thibaut Lavril, Gautier Izacard, Xavier Martinet, Marie-Anne Lachaux, Timoth´ee Lacroix, Baptiste Rozi `ere, Naman Goyal, Eric Hambro, Faisal Azhar, et al. Llama: Open and efficient foundation language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.13971 , 2023

    2023 arXiv

  45. [53]

    Vicuna: An open-source chatbot impressing gpt-4 with 90%* chatgpt quality

    Wei-Lin Chiang, Zhuohan Li, Ziqing Lin, Ying Sheng, Zhang- hao Wu, Hao Zhang, Lianmin Zheng, Siyuan Zhuang, Yonghao Zhuang, Joseph E Gonzalez, et al. Vicuna: An open-source chatbot impressing gpt-4 with 90%* chatgpt quality. See https://vicuna. lmsys. org (accessed 14 April 20...

    2023

  46. [54]

    Learning transferable visual models from natural language supervision

    Alec Radford, Jong Wook Kim, Chris Hallacy, Aditya Ramesh, Gabriel Goh, Sandhini Agarwal, Girish Sastry, Amanda Askell, Pamela Mishkin, Jack Clark, et al. Learning transferable visual models from natural language supervision. In International confer- ence on machine learning, ...

    2021

  47. [55]

    Blip: Bootstrapping language-image pre-training for unified vision- language understanding and generation

    Junnan Li, Dongxu Li, Caiming Xiong, and Steven Hoi. Blip: Bootstrapping language-image pre-training for unified vision- language understanding and generation. In International conference on machine learning, pages 12888–12900. PMLR, 2022

    2022

  48. [56]

    Open-vocabulary video anomaly detection

    Peng Wu, Xuerong Zhou, Guansong Pang, Yujia Sun, Jing Liu, Peng Wang, and Yanning Zhang. Open-vocabulary video anomaly detection. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 18297–18307, 2024

    2024

  49. [57]

    Hawk: Learning to understand open-world video anomalies

    Jiaqi Tang, Hao Lu, Ruizheng Wu, Xiaogang Xu, Ke Ma, Cheng Fang, Bin Guo, Jiangbo Lu, Qifeng Chen, and Yingcong Chen. Hawk: Learning to understand open-world video anomalies. Ad- vances in Neural Information Processing Systems , 37:139751–139785, 2024

    2024

  50. [58]

    Harnessing large language models for training-free video anomaly detection

    Luca Zanella, Willi Menapace, Massimiliano Mancini, Yiming Wang, and Elisa Ricci. Harnessing large language models for training-free video anomaly detection. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , pages 18527–18536, 2024

    2024

  51. [59]

    Vera: Explainable video anomaly detection via verbalized learning of vision-language models

    Muchao Ye, Weiyang Liu, and Pan He. Vera: Explainable video anomaly detection via verbalized learning of vision-language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.01095, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  52. [60]

    Video anomaly detection and explanation via large language models

    Hui Lv and Qianru Sun. Video anomaly detection and explanation via large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.05702, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  53. [61]

    Image-text embedding learning via visual and textual semantic reasoning

    Kunpeng Li, Yulun Zhang, Kai Li, Yuanyuan Li, and Yun Fu. Image-text embedding learning via visual and textual semantic reasoning. IEEE transactions on pattern analysis and machine intelli- gence, 45(1):641–656, 2022

    2022

  54. [62]

    Tagclip: improving discrimination ability of zero-shot semantic segmentation

    Jingyao Li, Pengguang Chen, Shengju Qian, Shu Liu, and Jiaya Jia. Tagclip: improving discrimination ability of zero-shot semantic segmentation. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 2024

    2024

  55. [63]

    Learning continuous hierar- chies in the lorentz model of hyperbolic geometry

    Maximillian Nickel and Douwe Kiela. Learning continuous hierar- chies in the lorentz model of hyperbolic geometry. In International conference on machine learning, pages 3779–3788. PMLR, 2018

    2018

  56. [64]

    Quo vadis, action recogni- tion? a new model and the kinetics dataset

    Joao Carreira and Andrew Zisserman. Quo vadis, action recogni- tion? a new model and the kinetics dataset. In proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , pages 6299–6308, 2017

    2017

  57. [65]

    Cnn architectures for large- scale audio classification

    Shawn Hershey, Sourish Chaudhuri, Daniel PW Ellis, Jort F Gem- meke, Aren Jansen, R Channing Moore, Manoj Plakal, Devin Platt, Rif A Saurous, Bryan Seybold, et al. Cnn architectures for large- scale audio classification. In 2017 ieee international conference on acoustics, spee...

    2017

  58. [66]

    Blip- 2: Bootstrapping language-image pre-training with frozen image encoders and large language models

    Junnan Li, Dongxu Li, Silvio Savarese, and Steven Hoi. Blip- 2: Bootstrapping language-image pre-training with frozen image encoders and large language models. In International conference on machine learning, pages 19730–19742. PMLR, 2023

    2023

  59. [67]

    Adam: A method for stochastic optimization

    Diederik P Kingma and Jimmy Ba. Adam: A method for stochastic optimization. arXiv preprint arXiv:1412.6980, 2014

    2014 arXiv

  60. [68]

    Decoupled weight decay regularization

    Ilya Loshchilov and Frank Hutter. Decoupled weight decay regularization. arXiv preprint arXiv:1711.05101, 2019

    2019 arXiv

  61. [69]

    Snapshot ensembles: Train 1, get m for free

    Gao Huang, Yixuan Li, Geoff Pleiss, Zhuang Liu, John E Hopcroft, and Kilian Q Weinberger. Snapshot ensembles: Train 1, get m for free. arXiv preprint arXiv:1704.00109, 2017

    2017 arXiv

  62. [70]

    Topological structure in visual perception

    Lin Chen. Topological structure in visual perception. Science, 218(4573):699–700, 1982

    1982

  63. [71]

    Representa- tion learning with contrastive predictive coding

    Aaron van den Oord, Yazhe Li, and Oriol Vinyals. Representa- tion learning with contrastive predictive coding. arXiv preprint arXiv:1807.03748, 2018

    2018 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.