Duration of RealTalk

[KevinGoodman]

I'm curious why the duration mentioned in the paper for RealTalk is only 8 hours, while the original paper states it as 115 hours. The difference in magnitude is significant.

[ZiqiaoPeng]

RealTalk paper states: a total of 115 hours of raw data, not processed data.

[KevinGoodman]

I would like to respectfully raise a few points of clarification regarding some statements in the paper, particularly around the dataset, which I believe is one of the core contributions of the paper. My goal is to foster a constructive discussion, and I appreciate your consideration of the following points:

1. RealTalk Dataset and Multi-Round Conversations: The paper does not classify the RealTalk dataset as containing multi-round conversations. However, the average conversation length in RealTalk is around 10 minutes. I respectfully disagree with this characterization, as conversations of this length naturally imply multiple exchanges, not just single-turn dialogues. It would be helpful to clarify this distinction in the context of the dataset’s design.

2. EMOCA Annotations and Motion Estimation Accuracy: The RealTalk dataset provides EMOCA annotations for most of the frame. In my preliminary, random visualizations for both RealTalk and DualTalk dataset, I observed no significant difference in motion estimation accuracy between the two. Additionally, I conducted a simple continuous-frame subset selection for RealTalk and still obtained ~100 hours of data. However, in your work, RealTalk is reported as having only 8 hours of data without further explanation. Could you please clarify the filtering process or selection criteria used to arrive at this figure?

3. Data Overlap with RealTalk: Both the figures in your paper and the demo video on the website appear to include a substantial amount of data sourced from RealTalk. Could you kindly provide more information on the proportion of data derived from RealTalk in your study?

These clarifications are essential for fully understanding the contribution of the work. Your explanation will play a critical role in evaluating the true impact of the paper and its contributions to the field. I truly appreciate your attention to these points and look forward to your response.