MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2883750810 · doi:10.2478/amcs-2018-0030

Facial Expression Recognition under Difficult Conditions: A Comprehensive Study on Edge Directional Texture Patterns

2018· article· en· W2883750810 on OpenAlexaff
Faisal Ahmed, Md. Hasanul Kabir

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Applied Mathematics and Computer Science · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicFace and Expression Recognition
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceComputer sciencePattern recognition (psychology)Computer visionFeature (linguistics)Facial recognition systemNoise (video)Facial expressionLocal binary patternsFace (sociological concept)Texture (cosmology)Enhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionImage (mathematics)Histogram

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In recent years, research in automated facial expression recognition has attained significant attention for its potential applicability in human-computer interaction, surveillance systems, animation, and consumer electronics. However, recognition in uncontrolled environments under the presence of illumination and pose variations, low-resolution video, occlusion, and random noise is still a challenging research problem. In this paper, we investigate recognition of facial expression in difficult conditions by means of an effective facial feature descriptor, namely the directional ternary pattern (DTP). Given a face image, the DTP operator describes the facial feature by quantizing the eight-directional edge response values, capturing essential texture properties, such as presence of edges, corners, points, lines, etc. We also present an enhancement of the basic DTP encoding method, namely the compressed DTP (cDTP) that can describe the local texture more effectively with fewer features. The recognition performances of the proposed DTP and cDTP descriptors are evaluated using the Cohn-Kanade (CK) and the Japanese female facial expression (JAFFE) database. In our experiments, we simulate difficult conditions using original database images with lighting variations, low-resolution images obtained by down-sampling the original, and images corrupted with Gaussian noise. In all cases, the proposed method outperforms some of the well-known face feature descriptors.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

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 communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.263 · 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

Citations6
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Applied Mathematics and Computer ScienceSame topicFace and Expression RecognitionFrench-language works237,207