MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2890555171 · doi:10.1145/3236495

Persona

2018· article· en· W2890555171 on OpenAlexaff
Adriana Braun, Rossana Baptista Queiroz, WonSook Lee, Bruno Feijó, Soraia Raupp Musse

Bibliographic record

VenueComputers in entertainment · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicPersona Design and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado do Rio Grande do Sul
KeywordsPersonaComputer scienceAvatarSupport vector machineArtificial intelligenceFacial expressionSet (abstract data type)Expression (computer science)Feature selectionAction (physics)Feature (linguistics)Face (sociological concept)Human–computer interactionPattern recognition (psychology)Computer vision

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article proposes the Persona method. The goal of the prosposed method is to learn and classify the facial actions of actors in video sequences. Persona is based on standard action units. We use a database with main expressions mapped and pre-classified that allows the automatic learning and faces selection. The learning stage uses Support Vector Machine (SVM) classifiers to identify expressions from a set of feature points tracked in the input video. After that, labeled control 3D masks are built for each selected action unit or expression, which composes the Persona structure. The proposed method is almost automatic (little intervention is needed) and does not require markers on the actor’s face or motion capture devices. Many applications are possible based on the Persona structure such as expression recognition, customized avatar deformation, and mood analysis, as discussed in this article.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0380.026

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 head0.249
Teacher spread0.237 · 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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComputers in entertainmentSame topicPersona Design and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207