ADFAC: Automatic detection of facial articulatory features
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Using computer-vision and image processing techniques, we aim to identify specific visual cues as induced by facial movements made during monosyllabic speech production. The method is named ADFAC: Automatic Detection of Facial Articulatory Cues. Four facial points of interest were detected automatically to represent head, eyebrow and lip movements: nose tip (proxy for head movement), medial point of left eyebrow, and midpoints of the upper and lower lips. The detected points were then automatically tracked in the subsequent video frames. Critical features such as the distance, velocity, and acceleration describing local facial movements with respect to the resting face of each speaker were extracted from the positional profiles of each tracked point. In this work, a variant of random forest is proposed to determine which facial features are significant in classifying speech sound categories. The method takes in both video and audio as input and extracts features from any video with a plain or simple background. The method is implemented in MATLAB and scripts are made available on GitHub for easy access.•Using innovative computer-vision and image processing techniques to automatically detect and track keypoints on the face during speech production in videos, thus allowing more natural articulation than previous sensor-based approaches.•Measuring multi-dimensional and dynamic facial movements by extracting time-related, distance-related and kinematics-related features in speech production.•Adopting the novel random forest classification approach to determine and rank the significance of facial features toward accurate speech sound categorization.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
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.
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".