MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2054167736 · doi:10.1037/a0015766

Development of a FACS-verified set of basic and self-conscious emotion expressions.

2009· article· en· W2054167736 on OpenAlexaff
Jessica L. Tracy, Richard W. Robins, Roberta A. Schriber

Bibliographic record

VenueEmotion · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEmotion and Mood Recognition
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSadnessEmotion classificationSurprisePsychologyPrideDisgustAngerEmbarrassmentShameFacial expressionSet (abstract data type)HappinessAffective scienceCognitive psychologyFacial Action Coding SystemEmotional expressionSocial psychologyExpression (computer science)CommunicationComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 2 studies, the authors developed and validated of a new set of standardized emotion expressions, which they referred to as the University of California, Davis, Set of Emotion Expressions (UCDSEE). The precise components of each expression were verified using the Facial Action Coding System (FACS). The UCDSEE is the first FACS-verified set to include the three "self-conscious" emotions known to have recognizable expressions (embarrassment, pride, and shame), as well as the 6 previously established "basic" emotions (anger, disgust, fear, happiness, sadness, and surprise), all posed by the same 4 expressers (African and White males and females). This new set has numerous potential applications in future research on emotion and related topics.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.269 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations210
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEmotionSame topicEmotion and Mood RecognitionFrench-language works237,207