MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

On the Affective Bias of Emotional and Physiological States During Handling Media Content in K-line Mesh-Driven Repositories

2009· article· en· W1986420248 on OpenAlex
Anestis A. Toptsis

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Digital Content Technology and its Applications · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEmotion and Mood Recognition
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceLine (geometry)Content (measure theory)Multimedia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The emerging paradigm of ubiquitous computing can be better realized in the presence of intelligent machines that adjust their operation based on the user’s affectively driven behavior or disposition. In this work we provide a method that can be used to investigate how two types of affective attributes influence certain types of affective computing systems. Specifically, our method compares the suitability of emotion-based attributes versus the suitability of physiology-based attributes in affective computing systems that handle media content. We implement our method and use it to evaluate affective computing systems built for a variety of relevant affective attributes. Our findings indicate that, under certain conditions, the emotion-biased systems are more sensitive than the systems which are driven by purely physiology-based attributes.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.719
Threshold uncertainty score0.237

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.080
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.232 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it