In this paper, we show how to use audio to supervise the learning of active speaker detection in video. Voice Activity Detection (VAD) guides the learning of the vision-based classifier in a weakly supervised manner. The classifier uses spatio-temporal features to encode upper body motion - facial expressions and gesticulations associated with speaking. We further improve a generic model for active speaker detection by learning person specific models. Finally, we demonstrate the online adaptation of generic models learnt on one dataset, to previously unseen people in a new dataset, again using audio (VAD) for weak supervision. The use of temporal continuity overcomes the lack of clean training data. We are the first to present an active speaker detection system that learns on one audio-visual dataset and automatically adapts to speakers in a new dataset. This work can be seen as an example of how the availability of multi-modal data allows us to learn a model without the need for supervision, by transferring knowledge from one modality to another.
Automatic facial action unit (AFA) detection from video is a long-standing problem in facial expression analysis. Most approaches emphasize choices of features and classifiers. They neglect individual differences in target persons. People vary markedly in facial morphology (e.g., heavy versus delicate brows, smooth versus deeply etched wrinkles) and behavior. Individual differences can dramatically influence how well generic classifiers generalize to previously unseen persons. While a possible solution would be to train person-specific classifiers, that often is neither feasible nor theoretically compelling. The alternative that we propose is to personalize a generic classifier in an unsupervised manner (no additional labels for the test subjects are required). We introduce a transductive learning method, which we refer to Selective Transfer Machine (STM), to personalize a generic classifier by attenuating person-specific biases. STM achieves this effect by simultaneously learning a classifier and re-weighting the training samples that are most relevant to the test subject. To evaluate the effectiveness of STM, we compared STM to generic classifiers and to cross-domain learning methods in three major databases: CK+, GEMEP-FERA and RU-FACS. STM outperformed generic classifiers in all.