MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2026748890 · doi:10.1109/est.2013.11

An Efficient Facial Expression Recognition System in Infrared Images

2013· article· en· W2026748890 on OpenAlexafffund
Ahmad Poursaberi, Svetlana Yanushkevich, Marina L. Gavrilova

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicFace and Expression Recognition
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersAlberta Innovates - Technology Futures
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceComputer visionPattern recognition (psychology)Feature extractionComputer scienceWaveletFilter (signal processing)Feature (linguistics)InfraredPhysicsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Most of the reported algorithms for facial expression recognition (FER) are based on visible expression databases. However, visible images are affected by illumination variations which can cause significant disparities in image appearance and texture. In this paper preliminary results of a new FER algorithm, using Gauss-Laguerre (GL) filter of circular harmonic wavelets to extract features for infrared images, are presented. By using GL filters with properly tuned-parameters, it is possible to generate a set of redundant wavelets that enable an accurate extraction of complex texture features from an infrared image. In addition, we utilize GL filters that are highly suitable for FER in visible images. The combination of infrared and visible FER using common feature extraction approach saves time and reduces the complexity in a multiple-sensors scenario. K-nearest neighbor is used for classification on OTCBVS and USTC-NVIE databases. The results show effective performance for using GL filters in FER for infrared images.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations8
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFace and Expression RecognitionFrench-language works237,207