REVIEW 1 cited by
Ask Your Neurons: A Deep Learning Approach to Visual Question Answering
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
Signed reviews
read the original abstract
We address a question answering task on real-world images that is set up as a Visual Turing Test. By combining latest advances in image representation and natural language processing, we propose Ask Your Neurons, a scalable, jointly trained, end-to-end formulation to this problem. In contrast to previous efforts, we are facing a multi-modal problem where the language output (answer) is conditioned on visual and natural language inputs (image and question). We provide additional insights into the problem by analyzing how much information is contained only in the language part for which we provide a new human baseline. To study human consensus, which is related to the ambiguities inherent in this challenging task, we propose two novel metrics and collect additional answers which extend the original DAQUAR dataset to DAQUAR-Consensus. Moreover, we also extend our analysis to VQA, a large-scale question answering about images dataset, where we investigate some particular design choices and show the importance of stronger visual models. At the same time, we achieve strong performance of our model that still uses a global image representation. Finally, based on such analysis, we refine our Ask Your Neurons on DAQUAR, which also leads to a better performance on this challenging task.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Mobile Robots through Task-Based Human Instructions using Incremental Curriculum Learning
A simulated mobile robot learns multi-step household instructions better when training is staged from short sub-goals to full instructions, but the supporting experiments lack quantitative comparison.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.