Demo Data from SIGIR 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Aaron Nech
dblp:200/7916
· DBLP profile ↗
1ranked-venue papers
1as first author
0since 2021 · last 2017
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1 · 1 first-authorGraphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 1 · 1 first-author
Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.
| Artificial intelligence
1 paper |
Face, body and person analysis · 100% |
Topics — the 3 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Computer vision › Face, body and person analysis
face recognition |
0.3 | 1 | 2017 | Level Playing Field for Million Scale Face Recognition · CVPR 2017 |
Computer vision › Face, body and person analysis › face recognition
face recognition benchmark |
0.3 | 1 | 2017 | Level Playing Field for Million Scale Face Recognition · CVPR 2017 |
Computer vision › Face, body and person analysis › face recognition
large-scale face recognition |
0.3 | 1 | 2017 | Level Playing Field for Million Scale Face Recognition · CVPR 2017 |
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2017 | Level Playing Field for Million Scale Face RecognitionabstractFace recognition has the perception of a solved problem, however when tested at the million-scale exhibits dramatic variation in accuracies across the different algorithms [11]. Are the algorithms very different? Is access to good/big training data their secret weapon? Where should face recognition improve? To address those questions, we created a benchmark, MF2, that requires all algorithms to be trained on same data, and tested at the million scale. MF2 is a public large-scale set with 672K identities and 4.7M photos created with the goal to level playing field for large scale face recognition. We contrast our results with findings from the other two large-scale benchmarks MegaFace Challenge and MS-Celebs-1M where groups were allowed to train on any private/public/big/small set. Some key discoveries: 1) algorithms, trained on MF2, were able to achieve state of the art and comparable results to algorithms trained on massive private sets, 2) some outperformed themselves once trained on MF2, 3) invariance to aging suffers from low accuracies as in MegaFace, identifying the need for larger age variations possibly within identities or adjustment of algorithms in future testing. Aaron Nech, Ira Kemelmacher-Shlizerman |
CVPR | 1 |