skip to main content


Title: Content Extraction from Lecture Video via Speaker Action Classification Based on Pose Information
Online lecture videos are increasingly important e-learning materials for students. Automated content extraction from lecture videos facilitates information retrieval applications that improve access to the lecture material. A significant number of lecture videos include the speaker in the image. Speakers perform various semantically meaningful actions during the process of teaching. Among all the movements of the speaker, key actions such as writing or erasing potentially indicate important features directly related to the lecture content. In this paper, we present a methodology for lecture video content extraction using the speaker actions. Each lecture video is divided into small temporal units called action segments. Using a pose estimator, body and hands skeleton data are extracted and used to compute motion-based features describing each action segment. Then, the dominant speaker action of each of these segments is classified using Random forests and the motion-based features. With the temporal and spatial range of these actions, we implement an alternative way to draw key-frames of handwritten content from the video. In addition, for our fixed camera videos, we also use the skeleton data to compute a mask of the speaker writing locations for the subtraction of the background noise from the binarized key-frames. Our method has been tested on a publicly available lecture video dataset, and it shows reasonable recall and precision results, with a very good compression ratio which is better than previous methods based on content analysis.  more » « less
Award ID(s):
1640867
NSF-PAR ID:
10188706
Author(s) / Creator(s):
; ; ;
Date Published:
Journal Name:
2019 International Conference on Document Analysis and Recognition (ICDAR)
Page Range / eLocation ID:
1047 to 1054
Format(s):
Medium: X
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. Del Bimbo, Alberto ; Cucchiara, Rita ; Sclaroff, Stan ; Farinella, Giovanni M ; Mei, Tao ; Bertini, Marco ; Escalante, Hugo J ; Vezzani, Roberto. (Ed.)
    The volume of online lecture videos is growing at a frenetic pace. This has led to an increased focus on methods for automated lecture video analysis to make these resources more accessible. These methods consider multiple information channels including the actions of the lecture speaker. In this work, we analyze two methods that use spatio-temporal features of the speaker skeleton for action classification in lecture videos. The first method is the AM Pose model which is based on Random Forests with motion-based features. The second is a state-of-the-art action classifier based on a two-stream adaptive graph convolutional network (2S-AGCN) that uses features of both joints and bones of the speaker skeleton. Each video is divided into fixed-length temporal segments. Then, the speaker skeleton is estimated on every frame in order to build a representation for each segment for further classification. Our experiments used the AccessMath dataset and a novel extension which will be publicly released. We compared four state-of-the-art pose estimators: OpenPose, Deep High Resolution, AlphaPose and Detectron2. We found that AlphaPose is the most robust to the encoding noise found in online videos. We also observed that 2S-AGCN outperforms the AM Pose model by using the right domain adaptations. 
    more » « less
  2. Obeid, Iyad Selesnick (Ed.)
    Electroencephalography (EEG) is a popular clinical monitoring tool used for diagnosing brain-related disorders such as epilepsy [1]. As monitoring EEGs in a critical-care setting is an expensive and tedious task, there is a great interest in developing real-time EEG monitoring tools to improve patient care quality and efficiency [2]. However, clinicians require automatic seizure detection tools that provide decisions with at least 75% sensitivity and less than 1 false alarm (FA) per 24 hours [3]. Some commercial tools recently claim to reach such performance levels, including the Olympic Brainz Monitor [4] and Persyst 14 [5]. In this abstract, we describe our efforts to transform a high-performance offline seizure detection system [3] into a low latency real-time or online seizure detection system. An overview of the system is shown in Figure 1. The main difference between an online versus offline system is that an online system should always be causal and has minimum latency which is often defined by domain experts. The offline system, shown in Figure 2, uses two phases of deep learning models with postprocessing [3]. The channel-based long short term memory (LSTM) model (Phase 1 or P1) processes linear frequency cepstral coefficients (LFCC) [6] features from each EEG channel separately. We use the hypotheses generated by the P1 model and create additional features that carry information about the detected events and their confidence. The P2 model uses these additional features and the LFCC features to learn the temporal and spatial aspects of the EEG signals using a hybrid convolutional neural network (CNN) and LSTM model. Finally, Phase 3 aggregates the results from both P1 and P2 before applying a final postprocessing step. The online system implements Phase 1 by taking advantage of the Linux piping mechanism, multithreading techniques, and multi-core processors. To convert Phase 1 into an online system, we divide the system into five major modules: signal preprocessor, feature extractor, event decoder, postprocessor, and visualizer. The system reads 0.1-second frames from each EEG channel and sends them to the feature extractor and the visualizer. The feature extractor generates LFCC features in real time from the streaming EEG signal. Next, the system computes seizure and background probabilities using a channel-based LSTM model and applies a postprocessor to aggregate the detected events across channels. The system then displays the EEG signal and the decisions simultaneously using a visualization module. The online system uses C++, Python, TensorFlow, and PyQtGraph in its implementation. The online system accepts streamed EEG data sampled at 250 Hz as input. The system begins processing the EEG signal by applying a TCP montage [8]. Depending on the type of the montage, the EEG signal can have either 22 or 20 channels. To enable the online operation, we send 0.1-second (25 samples) length frames from each channel of the streamed EEG signal to the feature extractor and the visualizer. Feature extraction is performed sequentially on each channel. The signal preprocessor writes the sample frames into two streams to facilitate these modules. In the first stream, the feature extractor receives the signals using stdin. In parallel, as a second stream, the visualizer shares a user-defined file with the signal preprocessor. This user-defined file holds raw signal information as a buffer for the visualizer. The signal preprocessor writes into the file while the visualizer reads from it. Reading and writing into the same file poses a challenge. The visualizer can start reading while the signal preprocessor is writing into it. To resolve this issue, we utilize a file locking mechanism in the signal preprocessor and visualizer. Each of the processes temporarily locks the file, performs its operation, releases the lock, and tries to obtain the lock after a waiting period. The file locking mechanism ensures that only one process can access the file by prohibiting other processes from reading or writing while one process is modifying the file [9]. The feature extractor uses circular buffers to save 0.3 seconds or 75 samples from each channel for extracting 0.2-second or 50-sample long center-aligned windows. The module generates 8 absolute LFCC features where the zeroth cepstral coefficient is replaced by a temporal domain energy term. For extracting the rest of the features, three pipelines are used. The differential energy feature is calculated in a 0.9-second absolute feature window with a frame size of 0.1 seconds. The difference between the maximum and minimum temporal energy terms is calculated in this range. Then, the first derivative or the delta features are calculated using another 0.9-second window. Finally, the second derivative or delta-delta features are calculated using a 0.3-second window [6]. The differential energy for the delta-delta features is not included. In total, we extract 26 features from the raw sample windows which add 1.1 seconds of delay to the system. We used the Temple University Hospital Seizure Database (TUSZ) v1.2.1 for developing the online system [10]. The statistics for this dataset are shown in Table 1. A channel-based LSTM model was trained using the features derived from the train set using the online feature extractor module. A window-based normalization technique was applied to those features. In the offline model, we scale features by normalizing using the maximum absolute value of a channel [11] before applying a sliding window approach. Since the online system has access to a limited amount of data, we normalize based on the observed window. The model uses the feature vectors with a frame size of 1 second and a window size of 7 seconds. We evaluated the model using the offline P1 postprocessor to determine the efficacy of the delayed features and the window-based normalization technique. As shown by the results of experiments 1 and 4 in Table 2, these changes give us a comparable performance to the offline model. The online event decoder module utilizes this trained model for computing probabilities for the seizure and background classes. These posteriors are then postprocessed to remove spurious detections. The online postprocessor receives and saves 8 seconds of class posteriors in a buffer for further processing. It applies multiple heuristic filters (e.g., probability threshold) to make an overall decision by combining events across the channels. These filters evaluate the average confidence, the duration of a seizure, and the channels where the seizures were observed. The postprocessor delivers the label and confidence to the visualizer. The visualizer starts to display the signal as soon as it gets access to the signal file, as shown in Figure 1 using the “Signal File” and “Visualizer” blocks. Once the visualizer receives the label and confidence for the latest epoch from the postprocessor, it overlays the decision and color codes that epoch. The visualizer uses red for seizure with the label SEIZ and green for the background class with the label BCKG. Once the streaming finishes, the system saves three files: a signal file in which the sample frames are saved in the order they were streamed, a time segmented event (TSE) file with the overall decisions and confidences, and a hypotheses (HYP) file that saves the label and confidence for each epoch. The user can plot the signal and decisions using the signal and HYP files with only the visualizer by enabling appropriate options. For comparing the performance of different stages of development, we used the test set of TUSZ v1.2.1 database. It contains 1015 EEG records of varying duration. The any-overlap performance [12] of the overall system shown in Figure 2 is 40.29% sensitivity with 5.77 FAs per 24 hours. For comparison, the previous state-of-the-art model developed on this database performed at 30.71% sensitivity with 6.77 FAs per 24 hours [3]. The individual performances of the deep learning phases are as follows: Phase 1’s (P1) performance is 39.46% sensitivity and 11.62 FAs per 24 hours, and Phase 2 detects seizures with 41.16% sensitivity and 11.69 FAs per 24 hours. We trained an LSTM model with the delayed features and the window-based normalization technique for developing the online system. Using the offline decoder and postprocessor, the model performed at 36.23% sensitivity with 9.52 FAs per 24 hours. The trained model was then evaluated with the online modules. The current performance of the overall online system is 45.80% sensitivity with 28.14 FAs per 24 hours. Table 2 summarizes the performances of these systems. The performance of the online system deviates from the offline P1 model because the online postprocessor fails to combine the events as the seizure probability fluctuates during an event. The modules in the online system add a total of 11.1 seconds of delay for processing each second of the data, as shown in Figure 3. In practice, we also count the time for loading the model and starting the visualizer block. When we consider these facts, the system consumes 15 seconds to display the first hypothesis. The system detects seizure onsets with an average latency of 15 seconds. Implementing an automatic seizure detection model in real time is not trivial. We used a variety of techniques such as the file locking mechanism, multithreading, circular buffers, real-time event decoding, and signal-decision plotting to realize the system. A video demonstrating the system is available at: https://www.isip.piconepress.com/projects/nsf_pfi_tt/resources/videos/realtime_eeg_analysis/v2.5.1/video_2.5.1.mp4. The final conference submission will include a more detailed analysis of the online performance of each module. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Research reported in this publication was most recently supported by the National Science Foundation Partnership for Innovation award number IIP-1827565 and the Pennsylvania Commonwealth Universal Research Enhancement Program (PA CURE). Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official views of any of these organizations. REFERENCES [1] A. Craik, Y. He, and J. L. Contreras-Vidal, “Deep learning for electroencephalogram (EEG) classification tasks: a review,” J. Neural Eng., vol. 16, no. 3, p. 031001, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1088/1741-2552/ab0ab5. [2] A. C. Bridi, T. Q. Louro, and R. C. L. Da Silva, “Clinical Alarms in intensive care: implications of alarm fatigue for the safety of patients,” Rev. Lat. Am. Enfermagem, vol. 22, no. 6, p. 1034, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1590/0104-1169.3488.2513. [3] M. Golmohammadi, V. Shah, I. Obeid, and J. Picone, “Deep Learning Approaches for Automatic Seizure Detection from Scalp Electroencephalograms,” in Signal Processing in Medicine and Biology: Emerging Trends in Research and Applications, 1st ed., I. Obeid, I. Selesnick, and J. Picone, Eds. New York, New York, USA: Springer, 2020, pp. 233–274. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-36844-9_8. [4] “CFM Olympic Brainz Monitor.” [Online]. Available: https://newborncare.natus.com/products-services/newborn-care-products/newborn-brain-injury/cfm-olympic-brainz-monitor. [Accessed: 17-Jul-2020]. [5] M. L. Scheuer, S. B. Wilson, A. Antony, G. Ghearing, A. Urban, and A. I. Bagic, “Seizure Detection: Interreader Agreement and Detection Algorithm Assessments Using a Large Dataset,” J. Clin. Neurophysiol., 2020. https://doi.org/10.1097/WNP.0000000000000709. [6] A. Harati, M. Golmohammadi, S. Lopez, I. Obeid, and J. Picone, “Improved EEG Event Classification Using Differential Energy,” in Proceedings of the IEEE Signal Processing in Medicine and Biology Symposium, 2015, pp. 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1109/SPMB.2015.7405421. [7] V. Shah, C. Campbell, I. Obeid, and J. Picone, “Improved Spatio-Temporal Modeling in Automated Seizure Detection using Channel-Dependent Posteriors,” Neurocomputing, 2021. [8] W. Tatum, A. Husain, S. Benbadis, and P. Kaplan, Handbook of EEG Interpretation. New York City, New York, USA: Demos Medical Publishing, 2007. [9] D. P. Bovet and C. Marco, Understanding the Linux Kernel, 3rd ed. O’Reilly Media, Inc., 2005. https://www.oreilly.com/library/view/understanding-the-linux/0596005652/. [10] V. Shah et al., “The Temple University Hospital Seizure Detection Corpus,” Front. Neuroinform., vol. 12, pp. 1–6, 2018. https://doi.org/10.3389/fninf.2018.00083. [11] F. Pedregosa et al., “Scikit-learn: Machine Learning in Python,” J. Mach. Learn. Res., vol. 12, pp. 2825–2830, 2011. https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/1953048.2078195. [12] J. Gotman, D. Flanagan, J. Zhang, and B. Rosenblatt, “Automatic seizure detection in the newborn: Methods and initial evaluation,” Electroencephalogr. Clin. Neurophysiol., vol. 103, no. 3, pp. 356–362, 1997. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0013-4694(97)00003-9. 
    more » « less
  3. null (Ed.)
    Lecture videos are rapidly becoming an invaluable source of information for students across the globe. Given the large number of online courses currently available, it is important to condense the information within these videos into a compact yet representative summary that can be used for search-based applications. We propose a framework to summarize whiteboard lecture videos by finding feature representations of detected handwritten content regions to determine unique content. We investigate multi-scale histogram of gradients and embeddings from deep metric learning for feature representation. We explicitly handle occluded, growing and disappearing handwritten content. Our method is capable of producing two kinds of lecture video summaries - the unique regions themselves or so-called key content and keyframes (which contain all unique content in a video segment). We use weighted spatio-temporal conflict minimization to segment the lecture and produce keyframes from detected regions and features. We evaluate both types of summaries and find that we obtain state-of-the-art peformance in terms of number of summary keyframes while our unique content recall and precision are comparable to state-of-the-art. 
    more » « less
  4. null (Ed.)
    The state-of-the-art of fully-supervised methods for temporal action localization from untrimmed videos has achieved impressive results. Yet, it remains unsatisfactory for the weakly-supervised temporal action localization, where only video-level action labels are given without the timestamp annotation on when the actions occur. The main reason comes from that, the weakly-supervised networks only focus on the highly discriminative frames, but there are some ambiguous frames in both background and action classes. The ambiguous frames in background class are very similar to the real actions, which may be treated as target actions and result in false positives. On the other hand, the ambiguous frames in action class which possibly contain action instances, are prone to be false negatives by the weakly-supervised networks and result in a coarse localization. To solve these problems, we introduce a novel weakly-supervised Action Completeness Modeling with Back- ground Aware Networks (ACM-BANets). Our Background Aware Network (BANet) contains a weight-sharing two-branch architecture, with an action guided Background aware Temporal Attention Module (B-TAM) and an asymmetrical training strategy, to suppress both highly discriminative and ambiguous background frames to remove the false positives. Our action completeness modeling contains multiple BANets, and the BANets are forced to discover different but complementary action instances to completely localize the action instances in both highly discriminative and ambiguous action frames. In the 𝑖-th iteration, the 𝑖-th BANet discovers the discriminative features, which are then erased from the feature map. The partially-erased feature map is fed into the (i+1)-th BANet of the next iteration to force this BANet to discover discriminative features different from the 𝑖-th BANet. Evaluated on two challenging untrimmed video datasets, THUMOS14 and ActivityNet1.3, our approach outperforms all the current weakly-supervised methods for temporal action localization. 
    more » « less
  5. Understanding human behavior and activity facilitates advancement of numerous real-world applications, and is critical for video analysis. Despite the progress of action recognition algorithms in trimmed videos, the majority of real-world videos are lengthy and untrimmed with sparse segments of interest. The task of temporal activity detection in untrimmed videos aims to localize the temporal boundary of actions and classify the action categories. Temporal activity detection task has been investigated in full and limited supervision settings depending on the availability of action annotations. This paper provides an extensive overview of deep learning-based algorithms to tackle temporal action detection in untrimmed videos with different supervision levels including fully-supervised, weakly-supervised, unsupervised, self-supervised, and semi-supervised. In addition, this paper reviews advances in spatio-temporal action detection where actions are localized in both temporal and spatial dimensions. Action detection in online setting is also reviewed where the goal is to detect actions in each frame without considering any future context in a live video stream. Moreover, the commonly used action detection benchmark datasets and evaluation metrics are described, and the performance of the state-of-the-art methods are compared. Finally, real-world applications of temporal action detection in untrimmed videos and a set of future directions are discussed. 
    more » « less