MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2464774062 · doi:10.1162/leon_a_01330

Faces in Motion: Embodiment, Emotion and Interaction

2016· article· en· W2464774062 on OpenAlexaff
Barbara Nordhjem, Jan Klug, Bert Otten

Bibliographic record

VenueLeonardo · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicAesthetic Perception and Analysis
Canadian institutionsCentre for Interdisciplinary Research in Music Media and Technology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmbodied cognitionMotion (physics)Facial expressionAction (physics)Movement (music)CognitionMotion captureFace (sociological concept)Human–computer interactionComputer scienceDynamics (music)GestureCognitive sciencePsychologyCognitive psychologyArtificial intelligenceAestheticsNeuroscienceArtSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As humans, we express what we think and feel by facial movements, often without even realizing it. In the (e)motion installation, the goal was to create awareness of even the subtlest movements of the face, and to facilitate interaction purely based on facial expressions. Facial movements were tracked by custom software and translated into motion vectors, which were in turn visualized and coupled with sounds. Participants could interact within the installation by responding to each other’s facial movements. (e)motion was inspired by embodied cognition and scientific studies on emotion and action. The installation was the result of an interdisciplinary collaboration between art, movement science and cognitive neuroscience.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLeonardoSame topicAesthetic Perception and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207