AI News HubLIVE
Original source2 min read

More Motion Is Not Always Better Motion: Corpus Composition Governs Whether Augmentation Helps SMPL-Based Parkinsonian Gait Severity Estimation

arXiv:2608.23730v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: We grade MDS-UPDRS gait severity from SMPL motion using three frozen MotionAGFormer encoders as featurizers, reaching macro-F1 0.58 on a hidden, multi-site test set. Because the system's members differ only in their lifting corpus, evaluating encoders singly on that test set isolates what that corpus contributes. Six pools drawn from one inertial dataset, varying only in which walking tasks they include, score between 0.32 and 0.53, and just one of them beats the 0.51 of an encoder given no outside motion at all. What separates them is not how much data they hold but whether they carry a contrast in walking speed, the variation this representation appears to depend : a further pool adding a third collection site at fixed task composition does worse still. The same rule explains why exact synthetic motion and monocularly reconstructed web video both fail to help. Modifying the learned representation itself, rather than the corpus behind it, cost every variant that attempted it.

SourcearXiv Computer VisionAuthor: Michael Caiola, Andrew C. Weitz

-->

[Submitted on 24 Aug 2026]

Title:More Motion Is Not Always Better Motion: Corpus Composition Governs Whether Augmentation Helps SMPL-Based Parkinsonian Gait Severity Estimation

View a PDF of the paper titled More Motion Is Not Always Better Motion: Corpus Composition Governs Whether Augmentation Helps SMPL-Based Parkinsonian Gait Severity Estimation, by Michael Caiola and Andrew C. Weitz

View PDF HTML (experimental)

Abstract:We grade MDS-UPDRS gait severity from SMPL motion using three frozen MotionAGFormer encoders as featurizers, reaching macro-F1 0.58 on a hidden, multi-site test set. Because the system's members differ only in their lifting corpus, evaluating encoders singly on that test set isolates what that corpus contributes. Six pools drawn from one inertial dataset, varying only in which walking tasks they include, score between 0.32 and 0.53, and just one of them beats the 0.51 of an encoder given no outside motion at all. What separates them is not how much data they hold but whether they carry a contrast in walking speed, the variation this representation appears to depend : a further pool adding a third collection site at fixed task composition does worse still. The same rule explains why exact synthetic motion and monocularly reconstructed web video both fail to help. Modifying the learned representation itself, rather than the corpus behind it, cost every variant that attempted it.

Comments: 16 pages, 4 figures, 5 tables

Subjects:

Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (cs.CV)

Cite as: arXiv:2608.23730 [cs.CV]

(or arXiv:2608.23730v1 [cs.CV] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2608.23730

arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

Submission history

From: Michael Caiola [view email] [v1] Mon, 24 Aug 2026 18:17:53 UTC (104 KB)

Full-text links:

Access Paper:

View a PDF of the paper titled More Motion Is Not Always Better Motion: Corpus Composition Governs Whether Augmentation Helps SMPL-Based Parkinsonian Gait Severity Estimation, by Michael Caiola and Andrew C. Weitz

View PDF

HTML (experimental)

TeX Source

view license

Current browse context:

cs.CV

new | recent | 2026-08

Change to browse by:

cs

References & Citations

NASA ADS

Google Scholar

Semantic Scholar

Loading...

Data provided by:

Bibliographic Tools

Bibliographic and Citation Tools

Bibliographic Explorer Toggle

Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?)

Connected Papers Toggle

Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?)

Litmaps Toggle

Litmaps (What is Litmaps?)

scite.ai Toggle

scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?)

Code, Data, Media

Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article

alphaXiv Toggle

alphaXiv (What is alphaXiv?)

Links to Code Toggle

CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers (What is CatalyzeX?)

DagsHub Toggle

DagsHub (What is DagsHub?)

GotitPub Toggle

Gotit.pub (What is GotitPub?)

Huggingface Toggle

Hugging Face (What is Huggingface?)

ScienceCast Toggle

ScienceCast (What is ScienceCast?)

Demos

Demos

Replicate Toggle

Replicate (What is Replicate?)

Spaces Toggle

Hugging Face Spaces (What is Spaces?)

Spaces Toggle

TXYZ.AI (What is TXYZ.AI?)

Related Papers

Recommenders and Search Tools

Link to Influence Flower

Influence Flower (What are Influence Flowers?)

Core recommender toggle

CORE Recommender (What is CORE?)

Author

Venue

Institution

Topic

About arXivLabs

arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Which authors of this paper are endorsers? | Disable MathJax (What is MathJax?)