Feel The Music: Automatically Generating A Dance For An Input Song

We present a general computational approach that enables a machine to generate a dance for any input music. We encode intuitive, flexible heuristics for what a 'good' dance is: the structure of the dance should align with the structure of the music. This flexibility allows the agent to discover creative dances. Human studies show that participants find our dances to be more creative and inspiring compared to meaningful baselines. We also evaluate how perception of creativity changes based on different presentations of the dance. Our code is available at https://github.com/purvaten/feel-the-music.

Exploring Crowd Co-creation Scenarios for Sketches

As a first step towards studying the ability of human crowds and machines to effectively co-create, we explore several human-only collaborative co-creation scenarios. The goal in each scenario is to create a digital sketch using a simple web interface. We find that settings in which multiple humans iteratively add strokes and vote on the best additions result in the sketches with highest perceived creativity (value + novelty). Lack of collaboration leads to a higher variance in quality and lower novelty or surprise. Collaboration without voting leads to high novelty but low quality.

Improving Vision-and-Language Navigation with Image-Text Pairs from the Web

Following a navigation instruction such as 'Walk down the stairs and stop at the brown sofa' requires embodied AI agents to ground scene elements referenced via language (e.g. 'stairs') to visual content in the environment (pixels corresponding to 'stairs'). We ask the following question -- can we leverage abundant 'disembodied' web-scraped vision-and-language corpora (e.g. Conceptual Captions) to learn visual groundings (what do 'stairs' look like?) that improve performance on a relatively data-starved embodied perception task (Vision-and-Language Navigation)? Specifically, we develop VLN-BERT, a visiolinguistic transformer-based model for scoring the compatibility between an instruction ('...stop at the brown sofa') and a sequence of panoramic RGB images captured by the agent. We demonstrate that pretraining VLN-BERT on image-text pairs from the web before fine-tuning on embodied path-instruction data significantly improves performance on VLN -- outperforming the prior state-of-the-art in the fully-observed setting by 4 absolute percentage points on success rate. Ablations of our pretraining curriculum show each stage to be impactful -- with their combination resulting in further positive synergistic effects.

Are we pretraining it right? Digging deeper into visio-linguistic pretraining

Numerous recent works have proposed pretraining generic visio-linguistic representations and then finetuning them for downstream vision and language tasks. While architecture and objective function design choices have received attention, the choice of pretraining datasets has received little attention. In this work, we question some of the default choices made in literature. For instance, we systematically study how varying similarity between the pretraining dataset domain (textual and visual) and the downstream domain affects performance. Surprisingly, we show that automatically generated data in a domain closer to the downstream task (e.g., VQA v2) is a better choice for pretraining than "natural" data but of a slightly different domain (e.g., Conceptual Captions). On the other hand, some seemingly reasonable choices of pretraining datasets were found to be entirely ineffective for some downstream tasks. This suggests that despite the numerous recent efforts, vision & language pretraining does not quite work "out of the box" yet. Overall, as a by-product of our study, we find that simple design choices in pretraining can help us achieve close to state-of-art results on downstream tasks without any architectural changes.

Predicting A Creator's Preferences In, and From, Interactive Generative Art

As a lay user creates an art piece using an interactive generative art tool, what, if anything, do the choices they make tell us about them and their preferences? These preferences could be in the specific generative art form (e.g., color palettes, density of the piece, thickness or curvatures of any lines in the piece); predicting them could lead to a smarter interactive tool. Or they could be preferences in other walks of life (e.g., music, fashion, food, interior design, paintings) or attributes of the person (e.g., personality type, gender, artistic inclinations); predicting them could lead to improved personalized recommendations for products or experiences. To study this research question, we collect preferences from 311 subjects, both in a specific generative art form and in other walks of life. We analyze the preferences and train machine learning models to predict a subset of preferences from the remaining. We find that preferences in the generative art form we studied cannot predict preferences in other walks of life better than chance (and vice versa). However, preferences within the generative art form are reliably predictive of each other.

SQuINTing at VQA Models: Interrogating VQA Models with Sub-Questions

Existing VQA datasets contain questions with varying levels of complexity. While the majority of questions in these datasets require perception for recognizing existence, properties, and spatial relationships of entities, a significant portion of questions pose challenges that correspond to reasoning tasks -- tasks that can only be answered through a synthesis of perception and knowledge about the world, logic and / or reasoning. This distinction allows us to notice when existing VQA models have consistency issues -- they answer the reasoning question correctly but fail on associated low-level perception questions. For example, models answer the complex reasoning question "Is the banana ripe enough to eat?" correctly, but fail on the associated perception question "Are the bananas mostly green or yellow?" indicating that the model likely answered the reasoning question correctly but for the wrong reason. We quantify the extent to which this phenomenon occurs by creating a new Reasoning split of the VQA dataset and collecting Sub-VQA, a new dataset consisting of 200K new perception questions which serve as sub questions corresponding to the set of perceptual tasks needed to effectively answer the complex reasoning questions in the Reasoning split. Additionally, we propose an approach called Sub-Question Importance-aware Network Tuning (SQuINT), which encourages the model to attend do the same parts of the image when answering the reasoning question and the perception sub questions. We show that SQuINT improves model consistency by 7.8%, also marginally improving its performance on the Reasoning questions in VQA, while also displaying qualitatively better attention maps.

Large-scale Pretraining for Visual Dialog: A Simple State-of-the-Art Baseline

Prior work in visual dialog has focused on training deep neural models on the VisDial dataset in isolation, which has led to great progress, but is limiting and wasteful. In this work, following recent trends in representation learning for language, we introduce an approach to leverage pretraining on related large-scale vision-language datasets before transferring to visual dialog. Specifically, we adapt the recently proposed ViLBERT (Lu et al., 2019) model for multi-turn visually-grounded conversation sequences. Our model is pretrained on the Conceptual Captions and Visual Question Answering datasets, and finetuned on VisDial with a VisDial-specific input representation and the masked language modeling and next sentence prediction objectives (as in BERT). Our best single model achieves state-of-the-art on Visual Dialog, outperforming prior published work (including model ensembles) by more than 1% absolute on NDCG and MRR. Next, we carefully analyse our model and find that additional finetuning using 'dense' annotations i.e. relevance scores for all 100 answer options corresponding to each question on a subset of the training set, leads to even higher NDCG -- more than 10% over our base model -- but hurts MRR -- more than 17% below our base model! This highlights a stark trade-off between the two primary metrics for this task -- NDCG and MRR. We find that this is because dense annotations in the dataset do not correlate well with the original ground-truth answers to questions, often rewarding the model for generic responses (e.g. "can't tell").