4 ms·
Can we please stop using common names for new technologies? will make it harder to reference in a decade.
by worldofmatthew 4y ago
Can we please stop using common names for new technologies? will make it harder to reference in a decade.
- zamadatix 4y agoIt'll never happen. Best to qualify when searching "FILM interpolation" or expand when introducing "Frame Interpolation for Large Motion" as was done here. That way you get the best of both worlds, friendly acronym for active use and extremely referenceable name for long term or first time use. The long form is probably what you'd need to do without common abbreviations anyways, weird acronyms just to be unique doesn't help when actively using it now or a decade later when you're trying to reference back to it and nobody knows what gLMFI1 was anyways - unless it becomes extremely popular in which case gLMFI1 is a pain to use all the time.
- prox 4y agoIt’s not a distaster but it is better to use made up names, like filmz, filmy, filmerz, filmstack .. the list goes on.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- kentlyons 4y agoThey give the full proper citation for referencing the work: @inproceedings{reda2022film, title = {FILM: Frame Interpolation for Large Motion}, author = {Fitsum Reda and Janne Kontkanen and Eric Tabellion and Deqing Sun and Caroline Pantofaru and Brian Curless}, booktitle = {European Conference on Computer Vision (ECCV)}, year = {2022} }
- Hard_Space 4y agoYup. There's another framework called 'Feature-wise Linear Modulate' (FiLM), also related to video, but otherwise unrelated (note the lowercase 'i'); and thanks to Hasbro, Neural Radiance Fields (NeRF) is surprisingly difficult to search (but Hasbro was first, so NeRF not a great choice). I've seen 2-3 other examples of insane name duplication in CV research in the last couple of months.
- adammarples 4y agoFLiM would have been much better, and kind of funny