MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2996840610 · doi:10.1109/access.2019.2963113

Emotion Recognition From Body Movement

2019· article· en· W2996840610 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Access · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicHand Gesture Recognition Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceSadnessFeature selectionBiometricsFeature (linguistics)Feature extractionPattern recognition (psychology)Machine learningAngerPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Automatic emotion recognition from the analysis of body movement has tremendous potential to revolutionize virtual reality, robotics, behavior modeling, and biometric identity recognition domains. A computer system capable of recognizing human emotion from the body can also significantly change the way we interact with the computers. One of the significant challenges is to identify emotion-specific features from a vast number of descriptors of human body movements. In this paper, we introduce a novel two-layer feature selection framework for emotion classification from a comprehensive list of body movement features. We used the feature selection framework to accurately recognize five basic emotions: happiness, sadness, fear, anger, and neutral. In the first layer, a unique combination of Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) and Multivariate Analysis of Variance (MANOVA) was utilized to eliminate irrelevant features. In the second layer, a binary chromosome-based genetic algorithm was proposed to select a feature subset from the relevant list of features that maximizes the emotion recognition rate. Score and rank-level fusion were applied to further improve the accuracy of the system. The proposed system was validated on proprietary and public datasets, containing 30 subjects. Different action scenarios, such as walking and sitting actions, as well as an action-independent case, were considered. Based on the experimental results, the proposed emotion recognition system achieved a very high emotion recognition rate outperforming all of the state-of-the-art methods. The proposed system achieved recognition accuracy of 90.0% during walking, 96.0% during sitting, and 86.66% in an action-independent scenario, demonstrating high accuracy and robustness of the developed method.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.875
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.003

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 head0.277
Teacher spread0.244 · 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