Uganda To Host Climate Change, Artificial Intelligence Summit, Sept 5-6 - Independent Newspaper Nigeria
<a href="https://news.google.com/rss/articles/CBMimAFBVV95cUxNcnBtdldJUERlX0dzOTJEY2sybEc2ZjZSbUtiLWIzUUhJbkQ1N3BwUWlCcV95YmZNSmFGbFQ1enE5VWJlY0JBWDhlSENlNEFNMmM5Q0hrM080V3Q2eUF3cmpkeFBXRS01YXBpRUI4Uk5KOVY5bjFaRm1GNmVudGUtNTFmVDlBMDIyNGVGaF9WTkdHTDMxY1BZcw?oc=5" target="_blank">Uganda To Host Climate Change, Artificial Intelligence Summit, Sept 5-6</a> <font color="#6f6f6f">Independent Newspaper Nigeria</font>
Could not retrieve the full article text.
Read on Google News - AI Uganda →Sign in to highlight and annotate this article
Conversation starters
Daily AI Digest
Get the top 5 AI stories delivered to your inbox every morning.
More about
paper
![[R] VOID: Video Object and Interaction Deletion (physically-consistent video inpainting)](https://d2xsxph8kpxj0f.cloudfront.net/310419663032563854/konzwo8nGf8Z4uZsMefwMr/default-img-neural-network-P6fqXULWLNUwjuxqUZnB3T.webp)
[R] VOID: Video Object and Interaction Deletion (physically-consistent video inpainting)
We present VOID, a model for video object removal that aims to handle *physical interactions*, not just appearance. Most existing video inpainting / object removal methods can fill in pixels behind an object (e.g., removing shadows or reflections), but they often fail when the removed object affects the dynamics of the scene. For example: - A domino chain is falling → removing the middle blocks should stop the chain - Two cars are about to crash → removing one car should prevent the collision Current models typically remove the object but leave its effects unchanged, resulting in physically implausible outputs. VOID addresses this by modeling counterfactual scene evolution: “What would the video look like if the object had never been there?” Key ideas: - Counterfactual training data: paire
[D] Reviewer said he will increase his score but he hasn’t (yet)
Maybe someone here can help me figure this out. I have a reviewer who acknowledged my rebuttal and said they will increase their score*, but they haven’t. Their score is still 4, which was the initial score. Now I am very anxious about the AC reading this and thinking that they increased their score to 4 from a 3 ( meaning their initial thought was reject) because the other person who acknowledged and said they will increase their score did it on the spot at the same time, and I can see the updated score, but the other said they will but didn’t, and now I fear it will look like they did and that the 4 is the updated score ( meaning the initial score was a reject). I can answer to the rebuttal ( they said option A, fully resolved). I wonder if in my answer I should hint that they have yet t
Knowledge Map
Connected Articles — Knowledge Graph
This article is connected to other articles through shared AI topics and tags.
Discussion
Sign in to join the discussion
No comments yet — be the first to share your thoughts!