Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 57 references

Motif Guided Graph Transformer with Combinatorial Skeleton Prototype Learning for Skeleton-Based Person Re-Identification

T0 review · 4 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper claims that guiding a graph transformer with hierarchical structure and gait-collaboration motifs, plus contrasting random joint and frame subsets against identity prototypes, yields state-of-the-art skeleton person…

desk verdict Solid incremental re-ID paper with released code, but the motif mask in Eq. (5) is a soft bias, not the hard restriction the paper claims; still deserves a referee. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.09044 v2 pith:V3IGRWTO submitted 2024-12-12 cs.CV cs.AI

Haocong Rao , Chunyan Miao This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CVcs.AI
keywords Skeleton-basedpersonre-identificationGraphtransformermotifsGaitanalysisPrototypecontrastivelearningCombinatorialmasking3Dskeletonrepresentation
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

This paper argues that skeleton-based person re-identification is held back by two habits: treating all joint pairs as equally related, and averaging over whole skeletons or sequences when forming identity representations. MoCos replaces both habits. It guides a graph transformer with motif matrices that encode hierarchical body structure (neighbors up to three hops) and gait collaboration between limb joints, so attention concentrates on locally structured and gait-relevant relations. It then generates random spatial-temporal subsets of joints and frames—sub-skeletons and sub-tracklets—and contrasts them against per-identity prototypes. On five public benchmarks the authors report consistent gains over prior graph and sequence models, and show the components transfer to RGB-estimated skeletons, different graph scales, and unsupervised settings.

What carries the argument

The central machinery is a dual-level combinatorial prototype contrastive loss operating on motif-guided graph transformer features. The motif matrices $A^m$ and $B^m$ (Eq. 3, 4) act as relation masks in selected attention heads, implementing HSM and GCM; equation (5)-(6) replaces full relations with motif-guided relations $\hat{R}^{k,l}_{i,j}$. CSP's sub-skeleton $\hat{v}_t$ and sub-tracklet $V$ are formed by Bernoulli masking (Eq. 8-9), and contrasted with identity prototypes $c_k$ via the loss $L_{CSP}$ (Eq. 10-12). The paper notes that temporal masking in SimMC and average spatial masking in TranSG are special cases of this sub-tracklet representation, and that $L_{CSP}$ can be viewed as a generalized expectation-maximization solution.

What would settle it

Re-run MoCos on all five benchmarks with λ, ps, and pt selected on a held-out validation split rather than the test set, and compare validation-selected results to the reported numbers; if the gap over TranSG or Hi-MPC shrinks to within random seed noise, the motif and CSP components are not the cause of the reported gains. Alternatively, replace the HSM and GCM masks with random fixed masks of the same sparsity: if performance stays equal, the specific structural and gait content is not doing the work.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that encoding skeleton-specific relational structure into a transformer's attention heads, rather than letting attention learn all relations from data, yields more discriminative identity representations. The paper introduces hierarchical structural motifs (HSM), which assign each joint one of $2m+1$ semantic roles relative to a center joint up to order $m=3$, and gait collaborative motifs (GCM), which mark local relations within a limb and global relations across upper and lower limbs; these enter the attention computation as multiplicative masks in dedicated heads. On top of that, combinatorial skeleton prototype learning (CSP) builds sub-skeleton representations by Bernoulli-masking joint nodes and sub-tracklet representations by Bernoulli-masking frames, then pulls each combinatorial feature toward its identity prototype and pushes it away from others. MoCos, the combination, is reported to outperform existing state-of-the-art methods on BIWI, KS20, IAS, and KGBD, and to improve RGB-estimated CASIA-B results as well as unsupervised baselines when transferred.

Load-bearing premise

The reported accuracies assume the per-dataset hyperparameters (λ, ps, pt) were chosen without looking at test labels; the paper describes no validation split or tuning protocol, so if those values were selected on the test benchmarks the margins over baselines would be overstated.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the gains hold, attention heads in skeleton transformers should encode interpretable structural roles such as parent-child or same-limb collaboration rather than fully learned pairwise relations.
  • The CSP formulation means identity prototypes can benefit from combinatorially many partial views of a skeleton sequence, so masked sub-tracklets act as data augmentation without requiring extra training samples.
  • Because HSM and GCM are mask matrices, they can be plugged into any attention-based skeleton model, and CSP can be attached to non-transformer baselines, as demonstrated for unsupervised models.
  • On RGB-estimated and multi-scale graphs, the method's robustness suggests skeleton re-ID can work without depth sensors, widening real-world deployment options.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The paper's ablation isolates HSM, GCM, and CSP contributions, but the per-dataset hyperparameters (λ, ps, pt) are not tied to a validation split; reproducing with a validation-based protocol would test whether the reported margins are architectural or tuning artifacts.
  • Since CSP generalizes SimMC and TranSG masking as special cases, a fair comparison would need to give those baselines the same masking budgets and prototype loss; the paper's transfer experiments start to address this for unsupervised cases.
  • The motif definitions rely on a fixed skeleton joint layout (J=20, 25, or 14). Datasets with missing joints or different topology would need re-derived HSM/GCM matrices, so the generality claim could be probed by applying MoCos to partial-occlusion skeletons.
  • The EM interpretation of LCSP suggests the prototypes are class centroids; one could test whether a simpler non-transformer model with the same loss and masking matches much of the gain, which would separate the contribution of the motif-guided transformer from that of CSP.
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 / 6 minor

Summary. The paper proposes MoCos, a skeleton-based person re-identification method that combines a motif-guided graph transformer (MGT) with combinatorial skeleton prototype learning (CSP). MGT computes multi-head attention over skeleton graphs, using hierarchical structural motifs (HSM) and gait collaborative motifs (GCM) to bias joint-relation learning; CSP generates randomly masked sub-skeleton and sub-tracklet features and contrasts them against per-identity prototypes. Experiments are reported on IAS-A/B, KS20, BIWI-S/W, KGBD, and CASIA-B, with comparisons to hand-crafted, sequence-learning, graph-based, and appearance-based methods, plus ablations and generality studies. The central claim is that the HSM, GCM, and CSP components cause the reported accuracy improvements over state-of-the-art methods.

Significance. If the mechanism were as described, the paper would be a useful contribution: it proposes a generic way to inject skeleton-specific structure into graph transformers and reports consistent accuracy gains over a broad set of baselines on five datasets. The released code, the breadth of comparisons (including hand-crafted, graph, appearance-based, and unsupervised settings), and the generality experiments on RGB-estimated skeletons are concrete strengths. However, the current formulation of the motif mask does not implement the claimed hard restriction on attention, so the mechanism behind the empirical gains is not yet established; the per-dataset tuning protocol and the absence of error bars further weaken confidence in the magnitude of the reported improvements.

major comments (4)
  1. [Methodology, Eq. (5)-(6)] The motif guidance is implemented as multiplicative masking of the attention logits, not as a hard restriction. In Eq. (5), when M_{i,j}=0 the logit becomes 0, and after softmax it contributes exp(0)/Z = 1/Z, which is nonzero; non-motif positions therefore receive positive attention weight. Moreover, if the raw dot-product score for a motif position is negative, a masked non-motif position with logit 0 can receive more attention weight than the motif position. The claims that HSM and GCM make the model "focus" on hierarchical structural and gait collaborative relations are not supported by the stated operation. The authors should either replace the zero entries by -inf (or an equivalent additive mask) to implement true masking, or re-describe the component as a soft bias and adjust the corresponding claims and ablations.
  2. [Methodology, Eq. (3) and following text] Equation (3) defines A^m_{i,j}=1 only when j lies in the union of the 1- to m-hop neighborhoods, which normally excludes the node itself, while the text immediately below states that A1 contains three roles including "a joint node itself" and that R_m = 2m+1. These two statements are internally inconsistent: if the self-connection is intended, it must appear in the definition (for example as a separate 0-hop term); if it is not intended, the stated role counts and the structural interpretation of HSM need to be corrected. This inconsistency affects the actual matrix used in Eq. (6) and therefore the behavior of the method.
  3. [Experimental Setups, Implementation Details] The implementation details report dataset-specific values for lambda, ps, and pt (e.g., lambda = 0.9 for BIWI-W but 0.25 for BIWI-S; ps = 0.25 for IAS, BIWI, KS20 but 0.5 for KGBD) without describing a validation split or a tuning protocol. It is therefore unclear whether these hyperparameters were selected using test labels, which would inflate the reported gains over baselines that may not have received the same per-dataset tuning. The authors should specify the validation procedure, report results over multiple seeds as mean and standard deviation, and provide a sensitivity study over the main hyperparameters.
  4. [Table 2, rows 5-6] The ablation attributed to CSP is small: relative to MGT without CSP, the largest improvement is 1.5% Rank-1 and 1.1% mAP, and on some datasets the gain is smaller (e.g., 60.9 to 62.0 Rank-1 on KGBD). Since no error bars or significance tests are reported, it is not possible to tell whether this difference is above run-to-run variation. The claim that CSP "consistently achieves higher results" should be supported by repeated runs with variance or by a statistical test.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Related Works] Several citations appear as bare years or incomplete placeholders (e.g., "(2024; 2024; 2023; 2024)" and "(2004; 2007; 2022; 2023)"); these should be completed with author names and references.
  2. [Appendix references] The text refers to Appendix I and Appendix II for visualizations and an EM interpretation of the CSP loss, but the submitted manuscript does not include these appendices; either include them or remove the references, since the EM claim is not substantiated in the main text.
  3. [Methodology, Eq. (2) and (5)] The notation Softmax_j is unusual and should be clarified, for example by stating explicitly that normalization is over the index j for each fixed i.
  4. [Methodology, Eq. (8)] The definition says the maximum number of masked nodes is J-1 to avoid an empty sub-skeleton, but the Bernoulli sampling in Eq. (8) can in principle produce N_S=0; the practical sampling procedure (e.g., resampling until at least one node remains) should be stated explicitly.
  5. [Table 2] The baseline "direct prototype learning (DP)" in row 1 is not defined in the text; please provide its definition or a reference.
  6. [Tables 1 and 3] Some entries in the tables are visually crowded or contain unclear spacing (e.g., the CASIA-B C-N row and the underlined values); reformatting would improve readability.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: MoCos' motif masks and combinatorial prototype loss are defined independently of the reported accuracy gains, and the evaluation includes external baselines alongside the authors' prior models.

full rationale

The paper's core components—MGT's hierarchical structural motifs (Eq. 3), gait collaborative motifs (Eq. 4), their integration into attention (Eqs. 5-6), and CSP's combinatorial prototype loss (Eqs. 8-13)—are specified as concrete operations before any benchmark result is invoked. The loss and the attention masks are not fitted to the reported mAP/Rank-1 numbers, and the reported improvements are tested through ablations in Table 2 and comparisons with both external methods (PoseGait, ST-GCN, D13/D16) and the authors' earlier models (TranSG, SimMC, Hi-MPC). Self-citations to Rao/Miao prior work supply the baseline graph transformer backbone, graph-construction conventions, and standard experimental settings, but the motif-guided relation mechanism and combinatorial prototype learning are newly introduced here and are not defined in terms of their own outputs. The per-dataset hyperparameters (lambda, ps, pt) are listed without an explicit validation-split protocol, which is a reproducibility concern rather than a circularity, since the paper gives no evidence that they were tuned on test labels. The skeptical observation that Eq. (5)'s multiplicative mask does not hard-zero non-motif entries after softmax is an implementation-effectiveness issue, not a case where a prediction reduces by construction to an input. No equation in the paper assumes the conclusion that MoCos outperforms state-of-the-art methods, and no load-bearing claim is justified solely by a self-citation chain.

Assumptions & free parameters 6 free parameters · 8 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard deep learning machinery plus hand-designed inductive biases (physical joint connectivity, gait limb collaboration, 3-hop locality) and per-dataset hyperparameter choices. No new physical or formal entities are introduced; the 'motifs' are precomputed attention masks from existing skeleton structures.

free parameters (6)
  • lambda (fusion coefficient) = 0.9 (BIWI-W, KGBD, KS20), 0.25 (BIWI-S), 0.75 (IAS-A, IAS-B)
    Balances sub-tracklet and sub-skeleton prototype losses; chosen per dataset, suggesting tuning on the target benchmarks.
  • ps (spatial masking probability) = 0.25 (IAS, BIWI, KS20), 0.5 (KGBD)
    Bernoulli masking probability for joint nodes; set empirically per dataset.
  • pt (temporal masking probability) = 0.25 (all datasets)
    Bernoulli masking probability for skeleton frames; set empirically.
  • Model hyperparameters = L=2, H=8, D=128, Dk=16
    Architecture choices not systematically varied; could affect results.
  • Maximum HSM order m = 3
    Maximum neighborhood order for hierarchical structural motifs; justified by spine joints having up to 3-hop neighbors.
  • Temperatures tau1, tau2 = not reported
    Contrastive loss temperatures are not given in the main text, yet they affect the loss landscape.
assumptions (8)
  • standard math Graph Laplacian eigenvectors provide valid positional encodings for graph nodes (Eq. 1).
    Uses K smallest non-trivial eigenvectors of graph Laplacian, a standard spectral graph theory tool.
  • standard math Softmax attention and multi-head concatenation are valid for relational learning (Eqs. 2, 5, 7).
    Standard transformer machinery is used without modification.
  • standard math Bernoulli random masking followed by averaging yields useful representations (Eqs. 8-9).
    The paper assumes averaged masked subsets are informative views, a common assumption in contrastive learning.
  • domain assumption Physical connections between body joints define a graph whose structure is informative for identity (Skeleton Graph Construction).
    Adjacency matrix is initialized from adjacent body joints; assumes this physical connectivity carries identity-relevant cues.
  • domain assumption Gait, especially upper-lower limb collaboration, is identity-discriminative (Eq. 4).
    GCM masks are motivated by Murray et al. 1964; assumes collaborative limb motion encodes personal walking style.
  • domain assumption Up to 3-hop neighborhood structure is sufficient to capture hierarchical body relations (Eq. 3).
    Maximum order is set to 3 because spine joints have up to 3-hop neighbors; assumes higher-order relations add little.
  • domain assumption Randomly masked partial joints and frames are beneficial augmentations for prototype learning (Eqs. 8-9).
    No theoretical guarantee is provided; this is an empirical claim validated only by the ablations.
  • domain assumption Prototype centroids computed as means of class representations are stable and representative (Eq. 13).
    The contrastive loss assumes the averaged feature per identity is a good proxy for the class.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Motif Guided Graph Transformer with Combinatorial Skeleton Prototype Learning for Skeleton-Based Person Re-Identification." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/V3IGRWTO

@misc{pith2026241209044,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Motif Guided Graph Transformer with Combinatorial Skeleton Prototype Learning for Skeleton-Based Person Re-Identification},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/V3IGRWTO}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.09044}
}
read the original abstract

Person re-identification (re-ID) via 3D skeleton data is a challenging task with significant value in many scenarios. Existing skeleton-based methods typically assume virtual motion relations between all joints, and adopt average joint or sequence representations for learning. However, they rarely explore key body structure and motion such as gait to focus on more important body joints or limbs, while lacking the ability to fully mine valuable spatial-temporal sub-patterns of skeletons to enhance model learning. This paper presents a generic Motif guided graph transformer with Combinatorial skeleton prototype learning (MoCos) that exploits structure-specific and gait-related body relations as well as combinatorial features of skeleton graphs to learn effective skeleton representations for person re-ID. In particular, motivated by the locality within joints' structure and the body-component collaboration in gait, we first propose the motif guided graph transformer (MGT) that incorporates hierarchical structural motifs and gait collaborative motifs, which simultaneously focuses on multi-order local joint correlations and key cooperative body parts to enhance skeleton relation learning. Then, we devise the combinatorial skeleton prototype learning (CSP) that leverages random spatial-temporal combinations of joint nodes and skeleton graphs to generate diverse sub-skeleton and sub-tracklet representations, which are contrasted with the most representative features (prototypes) of each identity to learn class-related semantics and discriminative skeleton representations. Extensive experiments validate the superior performance of MoCos over existing state-of-the-art models. We further show its generality under RGB-estimated skeletons, different graph modeling, and unsupervised scenarios.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.09044 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Our approach exploits various graph motifs to en [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Schematics of our approach: First, with position-encoded node representations for each skeleton graph [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. (a) t-SNE visualization of features for the first ten classes in IAS and KS20. Different colors indicates different classes. (b) Visualization of mean relation values inferred by non-motif method (Rao and Miao 2023) (Left) and our Mo￾Cos (Right) on the same value scale and testing skeletons. validates generality and scalability of MoCos, which can be potentially applied to more general scenarios without labels. Feat… view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

57 extracted references · 52 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    , " * write output.state after.block = add.period write newline

    ENTRY address archivePrefix author booktitle chapter edition editor eid eprint howpublished institution isbn journal key month note number organization pages publisher school series title type volume year label extra.label sort.label short.list INTEGERS output.state before.all mid.sentence after.sentence after.block FUNCTION init.state.consts #0 'before.a...

  2. [2]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION n.dashify 't := "" t empty not t #1 #1 substring "-" = t #1 #2 substring "--" = not "--" * t #2 global.max substring 't := t #1 #1 substring "-" = "-" * t #2 global.max substring 't := while if t #1 #1 substring * t #2 global.max substring 't := if while FUNCTION word.in bbl.in capitalize " " * FUNCT...

  3. [3]

    O.; and Araujo, R

    Andersson, V. O.; and Araujo, R. M. 2015. Person identification using anthropometric and gait data from Kinect sensor. In Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI), 425--431

    work page 2015

  4. [4]

    B.; Cristani, M.; Del Bue, A.; Bazzani, L.; and Murino, V

    Barbosa, I. B.; Cristani, M.; Del Bue, A.; Bazzani, L.; and Murino, V. 2012. Re-identification with RGB-D sensors. In European Conference on Computer Vision (ECCV) Workshop, 433--442. Springer

    work page 2012

  5. [5]

    Z.; Zhou, M.; and Qian, X

    Boluki, S.; Ardywibowo, R.; Dadaneh, S. Z.; Zhou, M.; and Qian, X. 2020. Learnable Bernoulli dropout for Bayesian deep learning. In International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, 3905--3916. PMLR

    work page 2020

  6. [6]

    Cao, Z.; Hidalgo, G.; Simon, T.; Wei, S.-E.; and Sheikh, Y. 2019. OpenPose : Realtime multi-person 2D pose estimation using Part Affinity Fields. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 43(1): 172--186

    work page 2019

  7. [7]

    Chen, C.-H.; and Ramanan, D. 2017. 3D human pose estimation= 2D pose estimation+ matching. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 7035--7043

    work page 2017

  8. [8]

    V.; Kulis, B.; Jain, P.; Sra, S.; and Dhillon, I

    Davis, J. V.; Kulis, B.; Jain, P.; Sra, S.; and Dhillon, I. S. 2007. Information-theoretic metric learning. In International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML), 209--216

    work page 2007

Show all 57 references
  1. [9]

    P.; and Bresson, X

    Dwivedi, V. P.; and Bresson, X. 2021. A generalization of transformer networks to graphs. In AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI) Workshop

    2021

  2. [10]

    Fang, X.; Fang, W.; Liu, D.; Qu, X.; Dong, J.; Zhou, P.; Li, R.; Xu, Z.; Chen, L.; Zheng, P.; et al. 2024. Not all inputs are valid: Towards open-set video moment retrieval using language. In Proceedings of the ACM International Conference on Multimedia

    2024

  3. [11]

    Fang, X.; Liu, D.; Zhou, P.; and Nan, G. 2023. You can ground earlier than see: An effective and efficient pipeline for temporal sentence grounding in compressed videos. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR)

    2023

  4. [12]

    Farenzena, M.; Bazzani, L.; Perina, A.; Murino, V.; and Cristani, M. 2010. Person re-identification by symmetry-driven accumulation of local features. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 2360--2367. IEEE

    2010

  5. [13]

    Feng, S.; Miao, C.; Zhang, Z.; and Zhao, P. 2024. Latent diffusion transformer for probabilistic time series forecasting. In Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI), volume 38, 11979--11987

    2024

  6. [14]

    Gao, Z.; Jiang, C.; Zhang, J.; Jiang, X.; Li, L.; Zhao, P.; Yang, H.; Huang, Y.; and Li, J. 2023. Hierarchical graph learning for protein--protein interaction. Nature Communications, 14(1): 1093

    2023

  7. [15]

    Gray, D.; and Tao, H. 2008. Viewpoint invariant pedestrian recognition with an ensemble of localized features. In Proceedings of the European Conference on Computer Vision (ECCV), 262--275. Springer

    2008

  8. [16]

    Han, F.; Reily, B.; Hoff, W.; and Zhang, H. 2017. Space-time representation of people based on 3D skeletal data: A review. Computer Vision and Image Understanding, 158: 85--105

    2017

  9. [17]

    Hasan, M.; and Babaguchi, N. 2016. Long-term people reidentification using anthropometric signature. In International Conference on Biometrics Theory, Applications and Systems, 1--6. IEEE

    2016

  10. [18]

    Li, M.; Chen, S.; Chen, X.; Zhang, Y.; Wang, Y.; and Tian, Q. 2021. Symbiotic graph neural networks for 3d skeleton-based human action recognition and motion prediction. IEEE transactions on pattern analysis and machine intelligence, 44(6): 3316--3333

    2021

  11. [19]

    Liao, R.; Yu, S.; An, W.; and Huang, Y. 2020. A model-based gait recognition method with body pose and human prior knowledge. Pattern Recognition, 98: 107069

    2020

  12. [20]

    Liu, Z.; Zhang, Z.; Wu, Q.; and Wang, Y. 2015. Enhancing person re-identification by integrating gait biometric. Neurocomputing, 168: 1144--1156

    2015

  13. [21]

    Lu, J.; Wan, H.; Li, P.; Zhao, X.; Ma, N.; and Gao, Y. 2023. Exploring High-order Spatio-temporal Correlations from Skeleton for Person Re-identification. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing

    2023

  14. [22]

    Munaro, M.; Basso, A.; Fossati, A.; Van Gool, L.; and Menegatti, E. 2014 a . 3D reconstruction of freely moving persons for re-identification with a depth sensor. In International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), 4512--4519. IEEE

    2014

  15. [23]

    Munaro, M.; Fossati, A.; Basso, A.; Menegatti, E.; and Van Gool, L. 2014 b . One-shot person re-identification with a consumer depth camera. In Person Re-Identification, 161--181. Springer

    2014

  16. [24]

    T.; and Menegatti, E

    Munaro, M.; Ghidoni, S.; Dizmen, D. T.; and Menegatti, E. 2014 c . A feature-based approach to people re-identification using skeleton keypoints. In International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), 5644--5651. IEEE

    2014

  17. [25]

    P.; Drought, A

    Murray, M. P.; Drought, A. B.; and Kory, R. C. 1964. Walking patterns of normal men. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, 46(2): 335--360

    1964

  18. [26]

    C.; and Fred, A

    Nambiar, A.; Bernardino, A.; Nascimento, J. C.; and Fred, A. 2017. Context-aware person re-identification in the wild via fusion of gait and anthropometric features. In International Conference on Automatic Face & Gesture Recognition, 973--980. IEEE

    2017

  19. [27]

    D.; Mirza, S.; Mantini, P.; and Shah, S

    Nguyen, V. D.; Mirza, S.; Mantini, P.; and Shah, S. K. 2024. Attention-based shape and gait representations learning for video-based cloth-changing person re-identification. arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.03716

    2024 arXiv

  20. [28]

    Pala, P.; Seidenari, L.; Berretti, S.; and Del Bimbo, A. 2019. Enhanced skeleton and face 3D data for person re-identification from depth cameras. Computers & Graphics, 79: 69--80

    2019

  21. [29]

    Pr z ulj, N. 2007. Biological network comparison using graphlet degree distribution. Bioinformatics, 23(2): e177--e183

    2007

  22. [30]

    Rao, H.; Hu, X.; Cheng, J.; and Hu, B. 2021 a . SM-SGE : A Self-Supervised Multi-Scale Skeleton Graph Encoding Framework for Person Re-Identification. In Proceedings of the 29th ACM International Conference on Multimedia, 1812--1820

    2021

  23. [31]

    Rao, H.; Leung, C.; and Miao, C. 2024. Hierarchical skeleton meta-prototype contrastive learning with hard skeleton mining for unsupervised person re-identification. International Journal of Computer Vision, 132(1): 238--260

    2024

  24. [32]

    Rao, H.; Li, Y.; and Miao, C. 2022. Revisiting k-Reciprocal Distance Re-Ranking for Skeleton-Based Person Re-Identification. IEEE Signal Processing Letters, 29: 2103--2107

    2022

  25. [33]

    Rao, H.; and Miao, C. 2022. SimMC : Simple Masked Contrastive Learning of Skeleton Representations for Unsupervised Person Re-Identification. In International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI), 1290--1297

    2022

  26. [34]

    R ao, H.; and Miao, C. 2022. Skeleton Prototype Contrastive Learning with Multi-Level Graph Relation Modeling for Unsupervised Person Re-Identification. arXiv preprint arXiv:2208.11814

    2022 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Rao , H.; and Miao, C. 2023. TranSG : Transformer-Based Skeleton Graph Prototype Contrastive Learning with Structure-Trajectory Prompted Reconstruction for Person Re-Identification. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR)

    2023

  28. [36]

    Rao, H.; and Miao, C. 2024. A Survey on 3D Skeleton Based Person Re-Identification: Approaches, Designs, Challenges, and Future Directions. arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.15296

    2024

  29. [37]

    Rao , H.; Wang , S.; Hu , X.; Tan , M.; Da , H.; Cheng , J.; and Hu , B. 2020. Self-Supervised Gait Encoding with Locality-Aware Attention for Person Re-Identification. In International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI), volume 1, 898--905

    2020

  30. [38]

    Rao, H.; Wang, S.; Hu, X.; Tan, M.; Guo, Y.; Cheng, J.; Liu, X.; and Hu, B. 2021 b . A self-supervised gait encoding approach with locality-awareness for 3D skeleton based person re-identification. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 44(10): 6649--6666

    2021

  31. [39]

    Rao, H.; Xu, S.; Hu, X.; Cheng, J.; and Hu, B. 2021 c . Multi-Level Graph Encoding with Structural-Collaborative Relation Learning for Skeleton-Based Person Re-Identification. In International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI), 973--980

    2021

  32. [40]

    Rao, H.; Zeng, M.; Zhao, X.; and Miao, C. 2024. A Survey of Artificial Intelligence in Gait-Based Neurodegenerative Disease Diagnosis. arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.13082

    2024 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Sankar, A.; Zhang, X.; and Chang, K. C.-C. 2017. Motif-based convolutional neural network on graphs. arXiv preprint arXiv:1711.05697

    2017 arXiv

  34. [42]

    J.; Moore, R.; Kipman, A

    Shotton, J.; Fitzgibbon, A.; Cook, M.; Sharp, T.; Finocchio, M. J.; Moore, R.; Kipman, A. A.; and Blake, A. 2011. Real-time human pose recognition in parts from single depth images. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 1297--1304

    2011

  35. [43]

    Sporns, O.; and K \"o tter, R. 2004. Motifs in brain networks. PLoS biology, 2(11): e369

    2004

  36. [44]

    Van der Maaten, L.; and Hinton, G. 2008. Visualizing data using t-SNE . Journal of Machine Learning Research, 9(11): 2579--2605

    2008

  37. [45]

    Vezzani, R.; Baltieri, D.; and Cucchiara, R. 2013. People reidentification in surveillance and forensics: A survey. ACM Computing Surveys, 46(2): 1--37

    2013

  38. [46]

    Wang, T.; Gong, S.; Zhu, X.; and Wang, S. 2016. Person re-identification by discriminative selection in video ranking. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 38(12): 2501--2514

    2016

  39. [47]

    Wang, Z.; Wei, D.; Hu, X.; and Luo, Y. 2020. Human skeleton mutual learning for person re-identification. Neurocomputing, 388: 309--323

    2020

  40. [48]

    Q.; and Saul, L

    Weinberger, K. Q.; and Saul, L. K. 2009. Distance metric learning for large margin nearest neighbor classification. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 10(2): 207--244

    2009

  41. [49]

    Wen, Y.-H.; Gao, L.; Fu, H.; Zhang, F.-L.; and Xia, S. 2019. Graph CNNs with motif and variable temporal block for skeleton-based action recognition. In Proceedings of the AAAI conference on artificial intelligence, volume 33, 8989--8996

    2019

  42. [50]

    Wen, Y.-H.; Gao, L.; Fu, H.; Zhang, F.-L.; Xia, S.; and Liu, Y.-J. 2022. Motif-GCNs with local and non-local temporal blocks for skeleton-based action recognition. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 45(2): 2009--2023

    2022

  43. [51]

    Wu, A.; Zheng, W.-S.; and Lai, J.-H. 2017. Robust depth-based person re-identification. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, 26(6): 2588--2603

    2017

  44. [52]

    Yan , S.; Xiong , Y.; and Lin , D. 2018. Spatial Temporal Graph Convolutional Networks for Skeleton-Based Action Recognition. In Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI), 7444--7452

    2018

  45. [53]

    Ye, M.; Shen, J.; Lin, G.; Xiang, T.; Shao, L.; and Hoi, S. C. 2021. Deep learning for person re-identification: A survey and outlook. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 44(6): 2872--2893

    2021

  46. [54]

    Yu, S.; Tan, D.; and Tan, T. 2006. A framework for evaluating the effect of view angle, clothing and carrying condition on gait recognition. In International Conference on Pattern Recognition (ICPR), volume 4, 441--444. IEEE

    2006

  47. [55]

    Zhang, P.; Xu, J.; Wu, Q.; Huang, Y.; and Ben, X. 2020. Learning spatial-temporal representations over walking tracklet for long-term person re-identification in the wild. IEEE Transactions on Multimedia, 23: 3562--3576

    2020

  48. [56]

    Zheng, L.; Shen, L.; Tian, L.; Wang, S.; Wang, J.; and Tian, Q. 2015. Scalable person re-identification: A benchmark. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV), 1116--1124

    2015

  49. [57]

    Zhicheng, C.; Shibo, F.; Zhang, Z.; Xiao, X.; Gao, X.; and Zhao, P. 2024. SDformer: Similarity-driven Discrete Transformer For Time Series Generation. In The Thirty-eighth Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS)

    2024

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.