A New Automatic Visual Scene Segmentation Algorithm for Flash Movie

2019 ◽  
Vol 78 (22) ◽  
pp. 31617-31632
Author(s):  
Lin Shi ◽  
Zengxiao Chi ◽  
Xiangzeng Meng
2014 ◽  
Vol 44 (11) ◽  
pp. 2232-2240 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhi Liu ◽  
Shuqiong Xu ◽  
Yun Zhang ◽  
Chun Lung Philip Chen

2014 ◽  
Vol 513-517 ◽  
pp. 514-517
Author(s):  
Yun Zhu Xiang

In order to quickly and effectively segment the video scene, a multi-modality video scene segmentation algorithm with shot force competition is proposed in this paper. This method is take full account of temporal associated co-occurrence of multimodal media data, to calculate the similarity between video shot by merging the video low-level features, then go to the video scene segmentation based on the judgment method of shot competition. The authors experiments show that the video scene can be efficiently separated by the method proposed in the paper.


2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wei Liu ◽  
Huan Tian ◽  
Jun Hu ◽  
Shuai Cheng ◽  
Huai Yuan

2022 ◽  
Vol 59 (2) ◽  
pp. 102840
Author(s):  
Xianfeng Ou ◽  
Hanpu Wang ◽  
Wujing Li ◽  
Guoyun Zhang ◽  
Siyuan Chen

2010 ◽  
Vol 7 (9) ◽  
pp. 102-102
Author(s):  
L. Appelbaum ◽  
V. Vildavski ◽  
M. Pettet ◽  
A. Wade ◽  
A. Norcia

2019 ◽  
Vol 50 (4) ◽  
pp. 693-702 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christine Holyfield ◽  
Sydney Brooks ◽  
Allison Schluterman

Purpose Augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) is an intervention approach that can promote communication and language in children with multiple disabilities who are beginning communicators. While a wide range of AAC technologies are available, little is known about the comparative effects of specific technology options. Given that engagement can be low for beginning communicators with multiple disabilities, the current study provides initial information about the comparative effects of 2 AAC technology options—high-tech visual scene displays (VSDs) and low-tech isolated picture symbols—on engagement. Method Three elementary-age beginning communicators with multiple disabilities participated. The study used a single-subject, alternating treatment design with each technology serving as a condition. Participants interacted with their school speech-language pathologists using each of the 2 technologies across 5 sessions in a block randomized order. Results According to visual analysis and nonoverlap of all pairs calculations, all 3 participants demonstrated more engagement with the high-tech VSDs than the low-tech isolated picture symbols as measured by their seconds of gaze toward each technology option. Despite the difference in engagement observed, there was no clear difference across the 2 conditions in engagement toward the communication partner or use of the AAC. Conclusions Clinicians can consider measuring engagement when evaluating AAC technology options for children with multiple disabilities and should consider evaluating high-tech VSDs as 1 technology option for them. Future research must explore the extent to which differences in engagement to particular AAC technologies result in differences in communication and language learning over time as might be expected.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document