Automatic Assessment of Emotion Dysregulation in American, French, and Tunisian Adults and New Developments in Deep Multimodal Fusion: Cross-sectional Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Emotion dysregulation is a key dimension of adult psychological functioning. There is an interest in developing a computer-based, multimodal, and automatic measure. OBJECTIVE: We wanted to train a deep multimodal fusion model to estimate emotion dysregulation in adults based on their responses to the Multimodal Developmental Profile, a computer-based psychometric test, using only a small training sample and without transfer learning. METHODS: Two hundred and forty-eight participants from 3 different countries took the Multimodal Developmental Profile test, which exposed them to 14 picture and music stimuli and asked them to express their feelings about them, while the software extracted the following features from the video and audio signals: facial expressions, linguistic and paralinguistic characteristics of speech, head movements, gaze direction, and heart rate variability derivatives. Participants also responded to the brief version of the Difficulties in Emotional Regulation Scale. We separated and averaged the feature signals that corresponded to the responses to each stimulus, building a structured data set. We transformed each person's per-stimulus structured data into a multimodal codex, a grayscale image created by projecting each feature's normalized intensity value onto a cartesian space, deriving each pixel's position by applying the Uniform Manifold Approximation and Projection method. The codex sequence was then fed to 2 network types. First, 13 convolutional neural networks dealt with the spatial aspect of the problem, estimating emotion dysregulation by analyzing each of the codified responses. These convolutional estimations were then fed to a transformer network that decoded the temporal aspect of the problem, estimating emotional dysregulation based on the succession of responses. We introduce a Feature Map Average Pooling layer, which computes the mean of the convolved feature maps produced by our convolution layers, dramatically reducing the number of learnable weights and increasing regularization through an ensembling effect. We implemented 8-fold cross-validation to provide a good enough estimation of the generalization ability to unseen samples. Most of the experiments mentioned in this paper are easily replicable using the associated Google Colab system. RESULTS: We found an average Pearson correlation (r) of 0.55 (with an average P value of <.001) between ground truth emotion dysregulation and our system's estimation of emotion dysregulation. An average mean absolute error of 0.16 and a mean concordance correlation coefficient of 0.54 were also found. CONCLUSIONS: In psychometry, our results represent excellent evidence of convergence validity, suggesting that the Multimodal Developmental Profile could be used in conjunction with this methodology to provide a valid measure of emotion dysregulation in adults. Future studies should replicate our findings using a hold-out test sample. Our methodology could be implemented more generally to train deep neural networks where only small training samples are available.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".