A Calibrated Multimodal Ensemble for Ambivalence/Hesitancy Recognition: System Description and Private-Test Submission Strategy

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2607.12176v1
• Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2026 21:50:19 GMT
• Title: A Calibrated Multimodal Ensemble for Ambivalence/Hesitancy Recognition: System Description and Private-Test Submission Strategy
• Abstract summary: We describe a calibrated, equal-weight ensemble of three fusion models over frozen face, audio, text, and pose embeddings.<n>This year's private test, released on a disjoint set of 30 new participants, is scored on five allowed submissions.<n>Our first submission, an exact replica of the calibrated ensemble tuned only on public validation, scored 0.7361 macro-F1 on the private test.
• Score: 10.437764544103276
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
• Abstract: Ambivalence and hesitancy (A/H) undermine digital behaviour-change interventions, and recognizing them automatically from video is the goal of the ABAW A/H challenge on the BAH dataset. We describe our system for the 11th edition of the challenge: a calibrated, equal-weight ensemble of three fusion models over frozen face, audio, text, and pose embeddings, which reaches 0.7358 macro-F1 on the public test set. This year's private test, released on a disjoint set of 30 new participants, is scored on five allowed submissions; we report the configuration and rationale of each of our five submissions, and, where already available, the private-test score obtained. Our first submission, an exact replica of the calibrated ensemble tuned only on public validation, scored 0.7361 macro-F1 on the private test, matching our public-test estimate almost exactly and confirming the pipeline generalizes to unseen participants without leakage.

Related papers

• Solution for UCF UrbanTwin LUMPI Track: Sim-to-Real Urban LiDAR 3D Object Detection [54.03436243843709]
  We present our solution to the LUMPI track of the UCF UrbanTwin Sim2Real LiDAR Challenge at the 6th DriveX Workshop, ECCV 2026.<n>The detector must be trained only on synthetic data and is evaluated on 50 held-out real LiDAR frames.<n>A separate 50-frame synthetic submission is evaluated for point-cloud realism.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-09-07T15:03:36Z)
• Marginal Fidelity Does Not Establish User Simulation in Demographic Synthetic Survey Panels: Response Contracts, Support Collapse and Conditioning Failure [51.736723807086385]
  Population-marginal agreement is evidence about an elicitation contract and an estimand obtainable without simulated respondents, not evidence of individual simulation.<n>On nine aligned model-battery pairs, a no-persona population-prevalence query averages 6.27 MAE versus 12.39 for committed panels and wins all nine comparisons.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-09-07T10:22:22Z)
• Guaranteed Adaptive Modality Acquisition: When the Policy Chooses Its Own Calibration Group [0.0]
  A multimodal system may begin inference holding only some of its inputs and may acquire the rest at a cost.<n>We characterize when pattern-conditional guarantees remain valid and give two finite-sample constructions.<n>A counterexample shows that a guarantee proved for a calibration-independent grouping map need not transfer once the policy makes the terminal group calibration-dependent.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-16T04:19:31Z)
• CALM-AH: An ABAW11-Calibrated Multimodal Ensemble with Reliability-Gated Multi-Expert Consensus for Video-Level Ambivalence and Hesitancy Recognition [13.270837043204496]
  The ABAW11 A/H Video Recognition Challenge asks systems to assign a binary A/H label to each naturalistic interview video.<n>We present CALM-AH, a multimodal ensemble that combines textual, acoustic, visual, and derived behavioural-statistical features.<n>We further introduce Reliability-Gated Multi-Expert Consensus(RG-MEC), an anchor-preserving decision-level ensemble that combines an initial prediction with three complementary correction experts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-31T11:37:58Z)
• Let the Results Speak: A Replication-First Paradigm for LLM Behavioral Benchmarking [22.825786049667602]
  We propose a replication-first paradigm to anchor validity to a single human-rater consensus.<n>We certify the instrument via four properties -- reliability across K runs, cross-instrument replication across architecturally distinct judges, historical-footprint calibration via judges from earlier training cohorts, and pre-registered prediction.<n>We test it on emotional accompaniment by letting the self-evolve data-driven across: the dimensions are not pre-stipulated and the procedure stabilizes to a 9-dimension set.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-27T03:41:11Z)
• Perception or Prejudice: Can MLLMs Go Beyond First Impressions of Personality? [74.69723255239663]
  Grounded Personality Reasoning requires MLLMs to anchor each Big Five rating in observable evidence through a chain of rating, reasoning, and grounding.<n> MM-OCEAN is produced by a multi-agent pipeline with human verification, with timestamped behavioral observations, evidence-grounded trait analyses, and seven categories of cue-grounding MCQs.<n>The analysis uncovers a striking Prejudice Gap: across the field, 51% of correct ratings are not grounded in retrieved cues, and the Holistic-Grounding Rate spans only 0-33.5%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-21T07:42:47Z)
• Self-Verified Distillation: Your Language Model Is Secretly Its Own Synthetic Data Pipeline [56.53954182896384]
  We propose Self-Verified Distillation, a simple post-training refinement algorithm for large language models.<n>Self-Verified Distillation generates candidate solutions to unlabeled seed questions.<n>It filters them using prompt-based self-verification, and trains on the resulting self-curated dataset.<n>We find that sampling more candidate generations and using a larger verification budget during training data construction produces higher-quality self-curated data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-20T17:26:10Z)
• TAME: Test-Time Adversarial Prompt Tuning via Mixture-of-Experts for Vision-Language Models [76.92890872338235]
  Large-scale pre-trained Vision-Language models (VLMs) exhibit strong zero-shot generalization, yet are highly vulnerable to imperceptible adversarial perturbations.<n>To enhance robustness without requiring downstream task-specific retraining, we propose TAME, a novel test-time defense.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-17T18:07:08Z)
• Visual Aesthetic Benchmark: Can Frontier Models Judge Beauty? [59.923111838399144]
  We introduce the Visual Aesthetic Benchmark (VAB), which casts aesthetic evaluation as comparative selection over candidate sets with matched subject matter.<n>VAB contains 400 tasks and 1,195 images across fine art, photography, and illustration, with labels derived from the consensus of 10 independent expert judges per task.<n>We find that the strongest system identifies both the best and the worst image correctly across three random permutations of the candidate order in only 26.5% of tasks, far below the 68.9% achieved by human experts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-12T19:33:28Z)
• Multi-Dimensional Behavioral Evaluation of Agentic Stock Prediction Systems Using Large Language Model Judges with Closed-Loop Reinforcement Learning Feedback [1.2362187555287152]
  Forecast evaluation in finance has relied on aggregate accuracy metrics and predictive-accuracy tests built on point-forecast errors.<n>We propose a behavioral forecast-evaluation methodology that complements accuracy tests by assessing the intermediate decision process itself.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-07T06:31:34Z)
• Encyclo-K: Evaluating LLMs with Dynamically Composed Knowledge Statements [78.87065404966002]
  Existing benchmarks predominantly curate questions at the question level.<n>We propose Encyclo-K, a statement-based benchmark that rethinks benchmark construction from the ground up.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-31T13:55:54Z)
• A Confidence-Diversity Framework for Calibrating AI Judgement in Accessible Qualitative Coding Tasks [0.0]
  Confidence-diversity calibration is a quality assessment framework for accessible coding tasks.<n>Analysing 5,680 coding decisions from eight state-of-the-art LLMs, we find that mean self-confidence tracks inter-model agreement closely.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-04T03:47:10Z)
• SummExecEdit: A Factual Consistency Benchmark in Summarization with Executable Edits [31.98028879922584]
  We introduce SummExecEdit, a novel pipeline and benchmark to assess models on their ability to both detect factual errors and provide accurate explanations.<n>The top-performing model, Claude3-Opus, achieves a joint detection and explanation score of only 0.49 in our benchmark.<n>We identify four primary types of explanation errors, with 45.4% of them involving a focus on completely unrelated parts of the summary.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-17T23:26:44Z)
• Rotation Invariance and Extensive Data Augmentation: a strategy for the Mitosis Domain Generalization (MIDOG) Challenge [1.52292571922932]
  We present the strategy we applied to participate in the MIDOG 2021 competition. The purpose of the competition was to evaluate the generalization of solutions to images acquired with unseen target scanners. We propose a solution based on a combination of state-of-the-art deep learning methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-09-02T10:09:02Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.