Human Affective State Recognition and Classification During Human-Robot Interaction Scenarios
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A new novel breed of robots known as socially assistive robots is emerging. These robots are capable of providing assistance to individuals through social and cognitive interaction. The development of socially assistive robots for health care applications can provide measurable improvements in patient safety, quality of care, and operational efficiencies by playing an increasingly important role in patient care in the fast pace of crowded clinics, hospitals and nursing/veterans homes. However, there are a number of research issues that need to be addressed in order to design such robots. In this paper, we address one main challenge in the development of intelligent socially assistive robots: The robot’s ability to identify, understand and react to human intent and human affective states during assistive interaction. In particular, we present a unique non-contact and non-restricting sensory-based approach for identification and categorization of human body language in determining the affective state of a person during natural real-time human-robot interaction. This classification allows the robot to effectively determine its taskdriven behavior during assistive interaction. Preliminary experiments show the potential of integrating the proposed gesture recognition and classification technique into intelligent socially assistive robotic systems for autonomous interactions with people.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".