Video advertisements are powerful tools for affecting the public opinion, by appealing to the viewers’ emotions [Young(2008)]. To achieve persuasive power, many ads explore creative narrative techniques. One classic technique is “Freytag’s pyramid” where a story begins with exposition (setup), followed by rising action, then climax (action and sentiment peak), concluding with denouement or resolution (declining action) [Freytag(1896)].
In this work, we model the dynamic structure of a video ad. We track the pacing and intensity of the video, using both the visual and audio domains. We model how emotions change over the course of the ad. We also model correlations between specific settings (e.g., child’s bedroom), objects (e.g., teddy bear) and sentiments (e.g., happy). We propose two methods to predict climax, “the highest dramatic tension or a major turning point in the action” [mw()], of a video. Then we use them along with rich context features to predict the sentiment that the video provokes in the viewer. Our framework is illustrated in Fig. 1. Our techniques are based on the following two hypotheses which we verify in our experiments.
First, we hypothesize that the climax of a video correlates with dramatic visual changes or intense content. Thus, we compute optical flow per frame and detect shot boundaries, then predict that climax occurs at those moments in the video where peaks in optical flow vectors or shot boundary changes occur. To measure dynamics in the audio domain, we extract the amplitude of the sound channel and predict climax when we encounter peaks in the amplitude. In addition to this unsupervised approach, we also show how to use the cues we develop as features, to predict climax in a supervised way. Both the unsupervised and supervised approaches greatly outperform the baseline tested.
Second, we hypothesize that video ads exploit associations that humans make, to create an emotional effect. We aim to predict the sentiment that an ad provokes in the viewer, and hypothesize that the setting and objects in the ad are greatly responsible for the sentiment evoked. We first extract predictions about the type of scene and type of objects in the ad, for each frame. We also hypothesize that the facial expressions of the subjects of the ad (i.e., the people in the ad) correlate with the sentiment provoked in the people watching it, so we also extract per-frame facial expression predictions. We treat sentiment prediction as a recurrent prediction task based on the scene, object, and emotion features, as well as features related to climax and standard ResNet [He et al.(2016)He, Zhang, Ren, and Sun] visual features.
To train our methods and test our hypotheses, we crowdsource climax annotations on 1,149 videos from the Video Ads Dataset of [Hussain et al.(2017)Hussain, Zhang, Zhang, Ye, Thomas, Agha, Ong, and Kovashka], and use the sentiment annotations provided.
2 Related Work
Video dynamics and actions. Optical flow [Fleet and Weiss(2006), Brox et al.(2004)Brox, Bruhn, Papenberg, and Weickert, Sun et al.(2010)Sun, Roth, and Black, Mayer et al.(2016)Mayer, Ilg, Hausser, Fischer, Cremers, Dosovitskiy, and Brox, Ilg et al.(2017)Ilg, Mayer, Saikia, Keuper, Dosovitskiy, and Brox, Ranjan and Black(2017)] is a basic building block of video understanding. We use [Ranjan and Black(2017)]
due to its simplicity and reliable accuracy. Higher-level analysis of video includes human pose estimation[Toshev and Szegedy(2014), Shotton et al.(2013)Shotton, Girshick, Fitzgibbon, Sharp, Cook, Finocchio, Moore, Kohli, Criminisi, Kipman, et al., Newell et al.(2016)Newell, Yang, and Deng] and action detection and recognition [Yeung et al.(2016)Yeung, Russakovsky, Mori, and Fei-Fei, Gkioxari and Malik(2015), Wang et al.(2015)Wang, Qiao, and Tang, Carreira and Zisserman(2017)]
. Unlike these, optical flow does not capture semantics (such as the name of the action performed in a video). This is desirable in our case since a wide variety of activities can be exciting and climactic, so categorization is less useful. Anomaly detection[Mahadevan et al.(2010)Mahadevan, Li, Bhalodia, and Vasconcelos] is also related, but rather than predicting what does not fit, we wish to predict how a video builds up and increases its dramatic content to create the climax.
Emotions. Researchers have been interested in predicting facial expressions and emotions for a long time [Essa and Pentland(1997), Kanade et al.(2000)Kanade, Cohn, and Tian, Cohen et al.(2003)Cohen, Sebe, Garg, Chen, and Huang]. Large datasets exist [Mollahosseini et al.(2017)Mollahosseini, Hasani, and Mahoor, Benitez-Quiroz et al.(2016)Benitez-Quiroz, Srinivasan, Martinez, et al., Kosti et al.(2017)Kosti, Alvarez, Recasens, and Lapedriza]. We train a facial expression model on [Mollahosseini et al.(2017)Mollahosseini, Hasani, and Mahoor] and apply it on faces detected in the video, as a cue for the viewers’ sentiment.
Movie and story understanding. We attempt to understand the stories told by video ads. Others have previously developed techniques for understanding various aspects of movies, such as their plot [Tapaswi et al.(2016)Tapaswi, Zhu, Stiefelhagen, Torralba, Urtasun, and Fidler, Na et al.(2017)Na, Lee, Kim, and Kim] and the principal characters and their relations [Weng et al.(2009)Weng, Chu, and Wu]. While there is no prior work on detecting climax in ads, some previous approaches model the tempo of other videos. For example, [Liu et al.(2008)Liu, Li, Zhang, Tang, Song, and Yang] use cues like “motion intensity” and “audio pace” to detect action scenes. [Rasheed and Shah(2002)] use the pacing of a movie to recognize its genre (action movies are faster-paced than dramas). [Choi et al.(2016)Choi, Oh, and So Kweon] create video stories out of consumer videos, using story composition, dynamics and coherency, as cues. However, these works do not take emotions nor context such as scene and surrounding objects into account. We show semantic context features improve the performance of the unsupervised cues (e.g. “motion intensity”).
Advertisement and media understanding.
There is a recent trend to attempt to understand the visual media with computer vision techniques.[Joo et al.(2014)Joo, Li, Steen, and Zhu, Hussain et al.(2017)Hussain, Zhang, Zhang, Ye, Thomas, Agha, Ong, and Kovashka, Ye and Kovashka(2018), Won et al.(2017)Won, Steinert-Threlkeld, and Joo] analyze the hidden messages of images, in news articles [Joo et al.(2014)Joo, Li, Steen, and Zhu, Won et al.(2017)Won, Steinert-Threlkeld, and Joo] and advertisements [Hussain et al.(2017)Hussain, Zhang, Zhang, Ye, Thomas, Agha, Ong, and Kovashka]. [Joo et al.(2015)Joo, Steen, and Zhu, Wang et al.(2017)Wang, Feng, Hong, Berger, and Luo] examine the visual distinctions between people either running or voting in elections. We use the dataset of [Hussain et al.(2017)Hussain, Zhang, Zhang, Ye, Thomas, Agha, Ong, and Kovashka] for our study, and show that we greatly outperform their sentiment prediction model.
In The Advertising Research Handbook [Young(2008)], dramatic structure has four prototypical forms, shown in Fig. 2 (based on [Young(2008)] p.212). These structures depend on how positive and negative sentiment rises or declines. [Young(2008)] examines product ads, and the changes in positive/negative sentiment are correlated with appearances of the brand. In public service announcements (PSAs), the role of positive/negative might be reversed, as PSAs often aim to create negative sentiment in order to change a viewer’s behavior. However, understanding the story of PSAs still depends on understanding the climax of (negative) sentiment. Thus, we first collect data (Sec. 3.1) and develop features (Sec. 3.2) that help us predict when climax occurs. We then develop features informative for sentiment (Sec. 3.3). We finally describe how we use these features to predict the type of sentiment and occurrences of climax (Secs. 3.4 and 3.5).
3.1 Climax and sentiment data
We use the Video Ads Dataset of [Hussain et al.(2017)Hussain, Zhang, Zhang, Ye, Thomas, Agha, Ong, and Kovashka]. It contains 3,477 video advertisements with a variety of annotations, including the sentiment that the ad aims to provoke in the viewer. We collected climax annotations on a randomly chosen subset of 1,595 videos from this dataset, using the Amazon Mechanical Turk platform. We restricted participation on our tasks to annotators with at least 98% approval rate who submitted at least 1000 approved tasks in the past. We submitted each video for annotation to four workers. Each was asked to watch the video and could choose between two options, “the video has no climax” or “the video has climax.” If the latter, the worker was asked to provide the minute and second at which climax occurs (most videos are less than 1 min long). To ensure quality, annotators were also asked to describe what happens at the end of the video. Some of the videos in [Hussain et al.(2017)Hussain, Zhang, Zhang, Ye, Thomas, Agha, Ong, and Kovashka]’s dataset were not available, so the annotators could also mark this option. We ended up with 1,149 videos that contain climax annotations. We manually inspected a subset of them and found the timestamps were quite reasonable. The descriptions of what happened at the end were often quite detailed. We will make this data publicly available upon publication.
3.2 Climax indicators
We first analyze the dynamics of the video, using both visual and audio channels. We plot time on the x-axis, and measurement of dynamics/activity on the y-axis (Fig. 3). We consider three indicators of rapid activity: the amplitude of audio signals, the occurrence of shot boundaries, and the magnitude of optical flow vectors between frames.
In particular, we extract these features and portray them as follows:
The audio amplitude , which is the max amplitude of audio for the -th frame. We first extract the sound channel from the video, take a fixed number of samples from the sound wave per second, then compute the max across the samples for that frame.
The shot boundary indicator, which is equal to 0 or 1 depending on whether a shot boundary occurs in the -th frame. We use [Castellano()] for shot boundary extraction. In order to obtain more informative cues, we vary the parameters of [Castellano()] to get five 0/1 predictions per frame and use this 5D prediction as the representation for the -th frame. To generate the plot in Fig. 3, we aggregate information over all frames in a given second.
The optical flow magnitude , which is computed as where and are the horizontal and vertical optical flow components for each pixel in the -th frame. We use [Ranjan and Black(2017)] to extract optical flow vectors.
3.3 Sentiment indicators
The Advertising Research Handbook [Young(2008)] describes the dramatic structure of ads as closely depending on the emotion of the video. One type of structure (Fig. 2) is the “emotional pivot” where an ad starts with negative sentiment, which declines over time, to make room for increasing positive sentiment. The “emotional build” involves a gradual increase and climax in positive sentiment. Thus, the sentiment is equally crucial to understanding the story of the ad video as the climax. Since an ad targets an audience and wants to convince the audience to do something, it is the viewer’s sentiment that matters the most.
[Hussain et al.(2017)Hussain, Zhang, Zhang, Ye, Thomas, Agha, Ong, and Kovashka] contains annotations about what sentiment each ad video provokes in the viewer, collected from five annotators. These annotations involve 30 sentiments, both positive (e.g., cheerful, inspired, educated), negative (e.g., alarmed, angry) and neutral (e.g., empathetic). [Hussain et al.(2017)Hussain, Zhang, Zhang, Ye, Thomas, Agha, Ong, and Kovashka] also includes a baseline for predicting sentiment, using a multi-class SVM and C3D features [Tran et al.(2015)Tran, Bourdev, Fergus, Torresani, and Paluri]. The authors extract features from 16-frame video clips, then average the features. Thus, their model does not capture the dynamics and sequential nature of the video. We hypothesize that if we model how the content of the video changes over time, and consider the context in which the sentiment in the video is conveyed, we would be able to model sentiment more accurately. We model sentiment with the following intuitive context features:
The setting in each frame of the video, i.e. the type of place/scene. Let be the vocabulary of places in the Places365 dataset [Zhou et al.(2017)Zhou, Lapedriza, Khosla, Oliva, and Torralba]. We use a pre-trained prediction model from [Zhou et al.(2017)Zhou, Lapedriza, Khosla, Oliva, and Torralba] to obtain a 365D vector , where
is the probability that the-th frame exemplifies the -th place.
The objects found in the video. Let be the vocabulary of the COCO object detection dataset [Lin et al.(2014)Lin, Maire, Belongie, Hays, Perona, Ramanan, Dollár, and Zitnick]. We use the model of [Huang et al.(2017)Huang, Rathod, Sun, Zhu, Korattikara, Fathi, Fischer, Wojna, Song, Guadarrama, and Murphy]
trained on COCO to get the objects in a frame. We then use max-pooling to turn the detection results into an 80D fixed-length feature vector, where is the maximum confidence score among multiple instances of the same object class , in frame .
The facial expressions in the video. We observed that the overall sentiment that the video provokes in the viewer often depends on the emotions that the subjects of the video go through. For example, if a child in an ad video is initially “happy” but later becomes “sad,” the sentiment provoked in the adult viewer might be “alarmed” because something disturbing must have happened. Thus, we also model emotions predicted on faces extracted per frame. We first detect the faces using OpenFace [Amos et al.(2016)Amos, Ludwiczuk, and Satyanarayanan]. We then extract the expression of each face using an Inception model [Szegedy et al.(2016)Szegedy, Vanhoucke, Ioffe, Shlens, and Wojna] trained on the AffectNet dataset [Mollahosseini et al.(2017)Mollahosseini, Hasani, and Mahoor]
. Two types of results are predicted: (1) the probability distribution among the eight expressions defined in AffectNet, and (2) the valence-arousal values for the face, saying how pleased and how active the person is (in range -1 to +1). We average the face expressions (10 values) for all faces detected in the-th frame, to get the 10D final representation .
The topic of the ads. [Hussain et al.(2017)Hussain, Zhang, Zhang, Ye, Thomas, Agha, Ong, and Kovashka] defines a vocabulary of 38 topics in the ads domain and also provides annotations for these topics. We hypothesize the overall sentiment that the video provokes is related to the topic the ad belongs to. For example, “sports” ads usually convey “active” and “manly” sentiments, while “domestic violence” ads often make people feel “sad”. Thus, we designed a multi-task learning framework with two objectives: one for the topic and the other for the sentiment prediction, hoping the topic prediction can help the prediction of sentiments. We first use the video-level feature (the last hidden state of the LSTM) to predict the 38D topic distribution, then concatenate this 38D vector with the video-level feature to predict the sentiment. The idea is described in Fig. 4.
We also use features from the last layer of a ResNet trained on ImageNet[He et al.(2016)He, Zhang, Ren, and Sun, Russakovsky et al.(2015)Russakovsky, Deng, Su, Krause, Satheesh, Ma, Huang, Karpathy, Khosla, Bernstein, et al.].
3.4 Unsupervised climax prediction
We can directly predict that climax occurs at times which are peaks in terms of shot boundary frequency, optical flow magnitude, or audio amplitude. Since the shot boundary frequency can be the same for many timeslots, we look for the longest sequence of timeslots which contain at least one shot boundary and predict the center of this “run” as a peak. Optical flow magnitudes and audio amplitudes are compared on a second-by-second basis. We extract the top- maximal responses from each plot, predict these as climax, and evaluate the performance in Sec. 4.3.
3.5 Supervised prediction
We predict climax using an LSTM (with 64 hidden units) that outputs 0/1 for each frame, where 1 denotes that the frame is predicted to contain climax. The frame-level features used are ResNet features (2048D), optical flow magnitude (1D), the shot boundary indicator (5D), the sound amplitude (1D), the place representation (365D), the object representation (80D), and the facial expression feature (10D).
For the sentiment prediction task, we also use an LSTM with 64 hidden units. We use the same frame-level features as the climax prediction. Moreover, we also add the predicted climax (1D) as extra information. Ads topics are used as both an additional loss/constraint and an extra feature for the sentiment prediction (see Fig. 4).
The advantages of our approach are as follows. First, the distribution of object, place, and facial expression probability vectors is much lower-dimensional than ResNet features, so given the limited size of the Video Ads Dataset (3,477), formulating the problem as learning a mapping from objects/scenes/facial expressions to sentiments/climax is much more feasible. The optical flow, shot boundary, and sound features are also very low-dimensional, and have clear correlation with the presence of climax. Further, understanding the sentiment of a video and its climax are related tasks. Thus, it is intuitive that climax predictions should be allowed to affect sentiment prediction; this is the idea shown in Fig. 1 where we use climax to select the part of the video which affects the elicited sentiment the most. We show in Sec. 4.4 (Table 4) that our semantic/climax features outperform the ResNet features, and the combination of the two achieves the strongest performance.
4 Experimental Validation
We first describe our experimental setup and training procedure, then present quantitative and qualitative results on the climax and sentiment prediction tasks.
4.1 Evaluation metrics
For the climax prediction task, we use the recall of the top- prediction () to measure performance. Since exactly matching the ground-truth climax timestamp is challenging, we apply an error window saying that the prediction is treated as correct if the ground-truth climax is close (within sec). We treat the prediction as correct if it recalls any of the ground-truth annotations for that video, except rejected work. Table 1 shows the results.
To measure how well the model’s prediction agrees with the sentiment annotations, we compute mean average precision (mAP) and top-1 accuracy (acc@1) based on three forms of agreement (agree with , where ). “Agree with ” means that we assign a ground-truth label to a video only if at least annotators agree on the existence of the sentiment. The acc@1 is the fraction of correct top-1 predictions across all videos, and the mAP is the mean of the average precision over evenly spaced recall levels. Tables 2, 3 and 4 show the results.
4.2 Training and implementation details
For training both the climax and sentiment prediction models, we use the TensorFlow[Abadi et al.(2016)Abadi, Barham, Chen, Chen, Davis, Dean, Devin, Ghemawat, Irving, Isard, et al.]deep learning framework. We split the Video Ads Dataset [Hussain et al.(2017)Hussain, Zhang, Zhang, Ye, Thomas, Agha, Ong, and Kovashka] (3,477 videos) into train/val/test (60%/20%/20%), resulting in around 2,000 training examples for the sentiment prediction task and about 700 training examples for the climax prediction task (since only 1,149 of the 3,477 videos have climax annotation). We report our results using five-fold cross-validation.
For the climax prediction task, we use a one-layer LSTM model with 64 hidden units. At each timestamp, the model predicts a real value ranging from (output of the sigmoid function) denoting whether the corresponding frame contains a climax. We then use the sigmoid cross entropy loss to constrain the model to mimic the human annotations.
(output of the sigmoid function) denoting whether the corresponding frame contains a climax. We then use the sigmoid cross entropy loss to constrain the model to mimic the human annotations.
Considering the size of the dataset, we set both the input and output dropout keep probability of the LSTM cell to 0.5 to avoid over-fitting. We use the RMSprop optimizer with a decay factor of 0.95, momentum of 1e-8, and learning rate of 0.0002. We train for 20,000 steps using a batch size of 32, and we use the recall of the top-1 prediction (the error window is set to “within 2 seconds”) to pick the best model on the validation set.
For the sentiment prediction task, we use the same procedure, but we pick the best model using mAP using “agreement with 2”. We use the last hidden state of the LSTM to represent the video feature and add a fully connected layer upon it to get the 38D topic representation. We then concatenate the 38D topic representation with the last hidden state of the LSTM and infer a 30D sentiment logits vector from the concatenated feature. The sigmoid cross entropy loss is also used here. Similar to[Teney et al.(2017)Teney, Anderson, He, and Hengel], we found that using soft scores as ground-truth targets improves the performance and makes the training more stable. To deal with data imbalance for the rare classes, we sampled at most negative samples if there were positives.
4.3 Climax prediction
We show the results of unsupervised and supervised climax prediction in Table 1
. We measure whether the predicted climax is within 0, 1, or 2 seconds of the ground-truth climax. We first show a heuristic-guess baseline which always predicts that climax occurs at 5 seconds for the top-1 prediction and at 5, 15 and 25 seconds for top-3. We then show the performance of the three unsupervised climax prediction methods described in Sec.3.4. Next, we show the performance of 0/1 climax prediction (Sec. 3.5) using an LSTM with ResNet features only, and finally our method using the features we proposed in both Sec. 3.2 and Sec. 3.3 (excluding the video-level topic feature).
|top-1 prediction||top-3 prediction|
|Method||w/in 0 s||w/in 1 s||w/in 2 s||w/in 0 s||w/in 1 s||w/in 2 s|
|shot boundary (unsup)||0.068||0.179||0.265||0.221||0.457||0.588|
|optical flow (unsup)||0.064||0.152||0.220||0.163||0.380||0.513|
|LSTM, ResNet only||0.071||0.206||0.290||0.190||0.400||0.523|
|LSTM, all feats (Ours)||0.077||0.209||0.287||0.226||0.439||0.546|
We see that the unsupervised methods, and especially shot boundary and audio, greatly outperform the baseline. Interestingly, audio performs quite well in the hardest setting, only one shot at prediction and exact alignment between predicted and ground-truth climax. Shot boundary achieves the best performance in the two weakest settings (top-3 predictions, agreement within 1-2 seconds). In all settings, our method achieves the best or second-best performance.
4.4 Sentiment prediction
Table 2 shows our main result for sentiment prediction. We compare to Hussain et al. [Hussain et al.(2017)Hussain, Zhang, Zhang, Ye, Thomas, Agha, Ong, and Kovashka]’s method which is a multi-class SVM model using the C3D features [Tran et al.(2015)Tran, Bourdev, Fergus, Torresani, and Paluri]. This is the only prior method that attempts to predict sentiment on the Video Ads Dataset. We observe that our method improves upon [Hussain et al.(2017)Hussain, Zhang, Zhang, Ye, Thomas, Agha, Ong, and Kovashka]’s performance for most metrics. The improvement is more significant for mAP, which is more reliable because of the imbalance of the dataset. We improve the mAP compared to prior art by up to 25% in terms of agreement with 3 annotators. For reference, human annotators’ agreement with 1 (at least one other annotator) is 0.723.
|Agree with 1||Agree with 2||Agree with 3|
|Hussain et al. [Hussain et al.(2017)Hussain, Zhang, Zhang, Ye, Thomas, Agha, Ong, and Kovashka]||0.283||0.664||0.135||0.435||0.075||0.243|
Table 3 examines the contribution of the features described in Sec. 3.2 and Sec. 3.3, and the use of an LSTM to model dynamics of the video. We compare against an LSTM that uses only ResNet features. We also compare to a bag-of-frames (BOF) method that rules out the effects of dynamics. It computes the final video-level representation by simply applying mean pooling among the frame-level features. We observe that our method (using the proposed features and LSTM) always outperforms the other methods in terms of mAP scores. Our method achieves significant improvement over the second-best method (10% for mAP and agreement with 2, and 21% for mAP and agreement with 3). In terms of accuracy, all methods perform similarly, and the best model (BOF, all features) also uses our proposed features.
|Agree with 1||Agree with 2||Agree with 3|
|BOF, ResNet only||0.295||0.708||0.141||0.449||0.076||0.242|
|LSTM, ResNet only||0.302||0.716||0.145||0.451||0.074||0.242|
|BOF, all features (incl. ours)||0.302||0.719||0.146||0.462||0.078||0.248|
|LSTM, all features (Our model)||0.313||0.712||0.160||0.449||0.094||0.241|
Table 4 verifies the benefit of each of our features. We show the LSTM-ResNet-only baseline from Table 3, then eight methods which add one of our features at a time, on top of this baseline. Next, we show an LSTM method which uses our features without the base ResNet feature, and finally, our full method. We use mAP for agreement with 3 in the table. We show the average result across all sentiment classes, then results for four individual ad sentiments. In bold are all methods which improve upon the ResNet baseline. We see that all of our features (the average column) contribute to the performance of our full method. Using all features except ResNet is stronger than using ResNet features alone. We note models based on individual features still show benefits on specific sentiment classes, and we believe the reason is that our fusion method is too simple to aggregate all the information.
|ResNet only (baseline)||0.074||0.036||0.117||0.047||0.007|
|all features except ResNet||0.080||0.038||0.104||0.036||0.007|
|all features (Our model)||0.094||0.026||0.099||0.202||0.005|
We observe some intuitive results for the four chosen individual sentiments. We ranked sentiments by frequency in the dataset and picked the 6th, 7th, 9th and 13th most frequent. For “educated,” the places feature is most beneficial, which makes sense because “education” might occur in particular environments, e.g., classroom. As shown in our example ad in Fig. 4, the setting (e.g., places) and dramatic content changes (measured by optical flow and shot boundaries) are quite telling of the “alarmed” sentiment. Most features help greatly for the “fashionable” sentiment. For “angry”, audio is very helpful (43% improvement over ResNet), which makes sense since loud speaking might trigger or correlate with anger.
We show qualitative examples in Fig. 5. Our model’s features correctly predict “amazed” and “fashionable” while the baseline method does not. Our method relies on recognized places (e.g. laboratory, beauty salon), objects, facial expressions, and climax dynamics.
We made encouraging progress in understanding the dynamic structure of a video ad. We hypothesized that climax correlates with dramatic visual and audio changes. We crowdsourced climax annotations on 1,149 videos from the Video Ads Dataset of [Hussain et al.(2017)Hussain, Zhang, Zhang, Ye, Thomas, Agha, Ong, and Kovashka] and used both unsupervised and supervised methods to predict the climax. By combining visual and audio cues with semantically meaningful context features, our sequential model (LSTM) outperforms the only prior work [Hussain et al.(2017)Hussain, Zhang, Zhang, Ye, Thomas, Agha, Ong, and Kovashka] by a large margin. To better understand the relations between the semantic visual cues and the sentiment each ad video provokes, we performed detailed ablations and found all the features we proposed help to understand the evoked sentiment. In the future, we will investigate other resources relevant to both climax and sentiment in video ads. We will also improve the interpretability of the model. Finally, our ablation studies show the limitation of the feature fusion method of our model thus we will investigate additional fusion strategies to further improve the performance.
This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant Number 1566270. This research was also supported by a Google Faculty Research Award and an NVIDIA hardware grant. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation. The authors also appreciate the help of Sanchayan Sarkar and Chris Thomas for preparing the data for and training the facial expression models.
- [mw()] Merriam-webster.com. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/climax.
[Abadi et al.(2016)Abadi, Barham, Chen, Chen, Davis, Dean, Devin,
Ghemawat, Irving, Isard, et al.]
Martín Abadi, Paul Barham, Jianmin Chen, Zhifeng Chen, Andy Davis, Jeffrey
Dean, Matthieu Devin, Sanjay Ghemawat, Geoffrey Irving, Michael Isard, et al.
Tensorflow: A system for large-scale machine learning.In OSDI, volume 16, pages 265–283, 2016.
[Amos et al.(2016)Amos, Ludwiczuk, and
Brandon Amos, Bartosz Ludwiczuk, and Mahadev Satyanarayanan.
Openface: A general-purpose face recognition library with mobile applications.CMU School of Computer Science, 2016.
[Benitez-Quiroz et al.(2016)Benitez-Quiroz, Srinivasan, Martinez,
Carlos Fabian Benitez-Quiroz, Ramprakash Srinivasan, Aleix M Martinez, et al.
Emotionet: An accurate, real-time algorithm for the automatic
annotation of a million facial expressions in the wild.
Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), pages 5562–5570, 2016.
- [Brox et al.(2004)Brox, Bruhn, Papenberg, and Weickert] Thomas Brox, Andrés Bruhn, Nils Papenberg, and Joachim Weickert. High accuracy optical flow estimation based on a theory for warping. In Proceedings of the European Conference on Computer Vision (ECCV), pages 25–36. Springer, 2004.
- [Carreira and Zisserman(2017)] Joao Carreira and Andrew Zisserman. Quo vadis, action recognition? a new model and the kinetics dataset. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), pages 4724–4733. IEEE, 2017.
- [Castellano()] Brandon Castellano. Pyscenedetect. https://github.com/Breakthrough/PySceneDetect/.
- [Choi et al.(2016)Choi, Oh, and So Kweon] Jinsoo Choi, Tae-Hyun Oh, and In So Kweon. Video-story composition via plot analysis. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 2016.
- [Cohen et al.(2003)Cohen, Sebe, Garg, Chen, and Huang] Ira Cohen, Nicu Sebe, Ashutosh Garg, Lawrence S Chen, and Thomas S Huang. Facial expression recognition from video sequences: temporal and static modeling. Computer Vision and image understanding, 91(1-2):160–187, 2003.
- [Essa and Pentland(1997)] Irfan A. Essa and Alex Paul Pentland. Coding, analysis, interpretation, and recognition of facial expressions. IEEE transactions on pattern analysis and machine intelligence, 19(7):757–763, 1997.
- [Fleet and Weiss(2006)] David Fleet and Yair Weiss. Optical flow estimation. In Handbook of mathematical models in computer vision, pages 237–257. Springer, 2006.
- [Freytag(1896)] Gustav Freytag. Freytag’s technique of the drama: an exposition of dramatic composition and art. Scholarly Press, 1896.
- [Gkioxari and Malik(2015)] Georgia Gkioxari and Jitendra Malik. Finding action tubes. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), pages 759–768. IEEE, 2015.
- [He et al.(2016)He, Zhang, Ren, and Sun] Kaiming He, Xiangyu Zhang, Shaoqing Ren, and Jian Sun. Deep residual learning for image recognition. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), pages 770–778, 2016.
- [Huang et al.(2017)Huang, Rathod, Sun, Zhu, Korattikara, Fathi, Fischer, Wojna, Song, Guadarrama, and Murphy] Jonathan Huang, Vivek Rathod, Chen Sun, Menglong Zhu, Anoop Korattikara, Alireza Fathi, Ian Fischer, Zbigniew Wojna, Yang Song, Sergio Guadarrama, and Kevin Murphy. Speed/accuracy trade-offs for modern convolutional object detectors. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), July 2017.
- [Hussain et al.(2017)Hussain, Zhang, Zhang, Ye, Thomas, Agha, Ong, and Kovashka] Zaeem Hussain, Mingda Zhang, Xiaozhong Zhang, Keren Ye, Christopher Thomas, Zuha Agha, Nathan Ong, and Adriana Kovashka. Automatic understanding of image and video advertisements. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), pages 1100–1110. IEEE, 2017.
- [Ilg et al.(2017)Ilg, Mayer, Saikia, Keuper, Dosovitskiy, and Brox] Eddy Ilg, Nikolaus Mayer, Tonmoy Saikia, Margret Keuper, Alexey Dosovitskiy, and Thomas Brox. Flownet 2.0: Evolution of optical flow estimation with deep networks. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), volume 2, 2017.
- [Joo et al.(2014)Joo, Li, Steen, and Zhu] Jungseock Joo, Weixin Li, Francis F Steen, and Song-Chun Zhu. Visual persuasion: Inferring communicative intents of images. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), pages 216–223, 2014.
- [Joo et al.(2015)Joo, Steen, and Zhu] Jungseock Joo, Francis F Steen, and Song-Chun Zhu. Automated facial trait judgment and election outcome prediction: Social dimensions of face. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV), pages 3712–3720, 2015.
- [Kanade et al.(2000)Kanade, Cohn, and Tian] Takeo Kanade, Jeffrey F Cohn, and Yingli Tian. Comprehensive database for facial expression analysis. In Automatic Face and Gesture Recognition, 2000. Proceedings. Fourth IEEE International Conference on, pages 46–53. IEEE, 2000.
- [Kosti et al.(2017)Kosti, Alvarez, Recasens, and Lapedriza] Ronak Kosti, Jose M Alvarez, Adria Recasens, and Agata Lapedriza. Emotic: Emotions in context dataset. In Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Workshops (CVPRW), 2017 IEEE Conference on, pages 2309–2317. IEEE, 2017.
- [Lin et al.(2014)Lin, Maire, Belongie, Hays, Perona, Ramanan, Dollár, and Zitnick] Tsung-Yi Lin, Michael Maire, Serge Belongie, James Hays, Pietro Perona, Deva Ramanan, Piotr Dollár, and C Lawrence Zitnick. Microsoft coco: Common objects in context. In Proceedings of the European Conference on Computer Vision (ECCV), pages 740–755. Springer, 2014.
- [Liu et al.(2008)Liu, Li, Zhang, Tang, Song, and Yang] Anan Liu, Jintao Li, Yongdong Zhang, Sheng Tang, Yan Song, and Zhaoxuan Yang. An innovative model of tempo and its application in action scene detection for movie analysis. In WACV, 2008.
- [Mahadevan et al.(2010)Mahadevan, Li, Bhalodia, and Vasconcelos] Vijay Mahadevan, Weixin Li, Viral Bhalodia, and Nuno Vasconcelos. Anomaly detection in crowded scenes. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), pages 1975–1981. IEEE, 2010.
- [Mayer et al.(2016)Mayer, Ilg, Hausser, Fischer, Cremers, Dosovitskiy, and Brox] Nikolaus Mayer, Eddy Ilg, Philip Hausser, Philipp Fischer, Daniel Cremers, Alexey Dosovitskiy, and Thomas Brox. A large dataset to train convolutional networks for disparity, optical flow, and scene flow estimation. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), pages 4040–4048, 2016.
- [Mollahosseini et al.(2017)Mollahosseini, Hasani, and Mahoor] Ali Mollahosseini, Behzad Hasani, and Mohammad H Mahoor. Affectnet: A database for facial expression, valence, and arousal computing in the wild. IEEE Transactions on Affective Computing, 2017.
- [Na et al.(2017)Na, Lee, Kim, and Kim] Seil Na, Sangho Lee, Jisung Kim, and Gunhee Kim. A read-write memory network for movie story understanding. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV), Oct 2017.
- [Newell et al.(2016)Newell, Yang, and Deng] Alejandro Newell, Kaiyu Yang, and Jia Deng. Stacked hourglass networks for human pose estimation. In Proceedings of the European Conference on Computer Vision (ECCV), pages 483–499. Springer, 2016.
- [Ranjan and Black(2017)] Anurag Ranjan and Michael J Black. Optical flow estimation using a spatial pyramid network. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), volume 2, 2017.
- [Rasheed and Shah(2002)] Zeeshan Rasheed and Mubarak Shah. Movie genre classification by exploiting audio-visual features of previews. In ICPR, 2002.
- [Russakovsky et al.(2015)Russakovsky, Deng, Su, Krause, Satheesh, Ma, Huang, Karpathy, Khosla, Bernstein, et al.] Olga Russakovsky, Jia Deng, Hao Su, Jonathan Krause, Sanjeev Satheesh, Sean Ma, Zhiheng Huang, Andrej Karpathy, Aditya Khosla, Michael Bernstein, et al. Imagenet large scale visual recognition challenge. International Journal of Computer Vision, 115(3):211–252, 2015.
- [Shotton et al.(2013)Shotton, Girshick, Fitzgibbon, Sharp, Cook, Finocchio, Moore, Kohli, Criminisi, Kipman, et al.] Jamie Shotton, Ross Girshick, Andrew Fitzgibbon, Toby Sharp, Mat Cook, Mark Finocchio, Richard Moore, Pushmeet Kohli, Antonio Criminisi, Alex Kipman, et al. Efficient human pose estimation from single depth images. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 35(12):2821–2840, 2013.
- [Sun et al.(2010)Sun, Roth, and Black] Deqing Sun, Stefan Roth, and Michael J Black. Secrets of optical flow estimation and their principles. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), pages 2432–2439. IEEE, 2010.
- [Szegedy et al.(2016)Szegedy, Vanhoucke, Ioffe, Shlens, and Wojna] Christian Szegedy, Vincent Vanhoucke, Sergey Ioffe, Jon Shlens, and Zbigniew Wojna. Rethinking the inception architecture for computer vision. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), pages 2818–2826, 2016.
- [Tapaswi et al.(2016)Tapaswi, Zhu, Stiefelhagen, Torralba, Urtasun, and Fidler] Makarand Tapaswi, Yukun Zhu, Rainer Stiefelhagen, Antonio Torralba, Raquel Urtasun, and Sanja Fidler. Movieqa: Understanding stories in movies through question-answering. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), pages 4631–4640, 2016.
- [Teney et al.(2017)Teney, Anderson, He, and Hengel] Damien Teney, Peter Anderson, Xiaodong He, and Anton van den Hengel. Tips and tricks for visual question answering: Learnings from the 2017 challenge. arXiv preprint arXiv:1708.02711, 2017.
[Toshev and Szegedy(2014)]
Alexander Toshev and Christian Szegedy.
Deeppose: Human pose estimation via deep neural networks.In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), pages 1653–1660, 2014.
- [Tran et al.(2015)Tran, Bourdev, Fergus, Torresani, and Paluri] Du Tran, Lubomir Bourdev, Rob Fergus, Lorenzo Torresani, and Manohar Paluri. Learning spatiotemporal features with 3d convolutional networks. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV), pages 4489–4497. IEEE, 2015.
- [Wang et al.(2015)Wang, Qiao, and Tang] Limin Wang, Yu Qiao, and Xiaoou Tang. Action recognition with trajectory-pooled deep-convolutional descriptors. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), pages 4305–4314, 2015.
- [Wang et al.(2017)Wang, Feng, Hong, Berger, and Luo] Yu Wang, Yang Feng, Zhe Hong, Ryan Berger, and Jiebo Luo. How polarized have we become? a multimodal classification of trump followers and clinton followers. In International Conference on Social Informatics, pages 440–456. Springer, 2017.
- [Weng et al.(2009)Weng, Chu, and Wu] Chung-Yi Weng, Wei-Ta Chu, and Ja-Ling Wu. Rolenet: Movie analysis from the perspective of social networks. IEEE Transactions on Multimedia, 11(2):256–271, 2009.
- [Won et al.(2017)Won, Steinert-Threlkeld, and Joo] Donghyeon Won, Zachary C Steinert-Threlkeld, and Jungseock Joo. Protest activity detection and perceived violence estimation from social media images. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM on Multimedia Conference, pages 786–794. ACM, 2017.
- [Ye and Kovashka(2018)] Keren Ye and Adriana Kovashka. Advise: Symbolism and external knowledge for decoding advertisements. In European Conference on Computer Vision (ECCV). Springer, 2018.
- [Yeung et al.(2016)Yeung, Russakovsky, Mori, and Fei-Fei] Serena Yeung, Olga Russakovsky, Greg Mori, and Li Fei-Fei. End-to-end learning of action detection from frame glimpses in videos. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), pages 2678–2687, 2016.
- [Young(2008)] Charles E Young. The advertising research handbook. Ideas in Flight, 2008.
[Zhou et al.(2017)Zhou, Lapedriza, Khosla, Oliva, and
Bolei Zhou, Agata Lapedriza, Aditya Khosla, Aude Oliva, and Antonio Torralba.
Places: A 10 million image database for scene recognition.IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 2017.