MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1987133329 · doi:10.1145/2661704.2661708

Detection and Visualization of Emotions in an Affect-Aware City

2014· article· en· W1987133329 on OpenAlexaff
Benjamin Guthier, Rajwa Alharthi, Rana Abaalkhail, Abdulmotaleb El Saddik

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHuman Mobility and Location-Based Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceAffect (linguistics)VisualizationSentiment analysisDominance (genetics)Social mediaArtificial neural networkEmotion detectionBig dataSpace (punctuation)ArousalArtificial intelligenceHuman–computer interactionEmotion recognitionWorld Wide WebPsychologyData miningSocial psychologyCommunication

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Smart cities use various deployed sensors and aggregate their data to create a big picture of the live state of the city. This live state can be enhanced by incorporating the affective states of the citizens. In this work, we automatically detect the emotions of the city's inhabitants from geo-tagged posts on the social network Twitter. Emotions are represented as four-dimensional vectors of pleasantness, arousal, dominance and unpredictability. In a training phase, emotion-word hashtags in the messages are used as the ground truth emotion contained in a message. A neural network is trained by using the presence of words, hashtags and emoticons in the messages as features. During the live phase, these features are extracted from new geo-tagged Twitter messages and given as input to the neural network. This allows the estimation of a four-dimensional emotion vector for a new message. The detected emotions are aggregated over space and time and visualized on a map of the city.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.313 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations44
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHuman Mobility and Location-Based AnalysisFrench-language works237,207