Researcher profile

Khai Loong Aw

Khai Loong Aw contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 13 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
2works
0followers
2topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

2 published item(s)

preprint2026arXiv

Characterizing the visual representation of objects from the child's view

Children acquire object category representations from their everyday experiences in the first few years of life. What do the inputs to this learning process look like? We analyzed first-person videos of young children's visual experience at home from the BabyView dataset ($N$ = 31 participants, 868 hours, ages 5--36 months), using a supervised object detection model to extract common object categories from more than 3 million frames. We found that children's object category exposure was highly skewed: a few categories (e.g., cups, chairs) dominated children's visual experiences while most categories appeared rarely, replicating previous findings from a more restricted set of contexts. Category exemplars were highly variable: children encountered objects from unusual angles, in highly cluttered scenes, and partially occluded views; many categories (especially animals) were most frequently viewed as depictions. Surprisingly, despite this variability, detected categories (e.g., giraffes, apples) showed stronger groupings within superordinate categories (e.g., animals, food) relative to groupings derived from canonical photographs of these categories. We found this same pattern when using high-dimensional embeddings from both self-supervised visual and multimodal models; this effect was also recapitulated in densely sampled data from individual children. Understanding the robustness and efficiency of visual category learning will require the development of models that can exploit strong superordinate structure and learn from non-canonical, sparse, and variable exemplars.

preprint2022arXiv

Detecting False Alarms from Automatic Static Analysis Tools: How Far are We?

Automatic static analysis tools (ASATs), such as Findbugs, have a high false alarm rate. The large number of false alarms produced poses a barrier to adoption. Researchers have proposed the use of machine learning to prune false alarms and present only actionable warnings to developers. The state-of-the-art study has identified a set of "Golden Features" based on metrics computed over the characteristics and history of the file, code, and warning. Recent studies show that machine learning using these features is extremely effective and that they achieve almost perfect performance. We perform a detailed analysis to better understand the strong performance of the "Golden Features". We found that several studies used an experimental procedure that results in data leakage and data duplication, which are subtle issues with significant implications. Firstly, the ground-truth labels have leaked into features that measure the proportion of actionable warnings in a given context. Secondly, many warnings in the testing dataset appear in the training dataset. Next, we demonstrate limitations in the warning oracle that determines the ground-truth labels, a heuristic comparing warnings in a given revision to a reference revision in the future. We show the choice of reference revision influences the warning distribution. Moreover, the heuristic produces labels that do not agree with human oracles. Hence, the strong performance of these techniques previously seen is overoptimistic of their true performance if adopted in practice. Our results convey several lessons and provide guidelines for evaluating false alarm detectors.