The Future of Emotion in Human-Computer Interaction
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Emotion has been studied in HCI for two decades, with specific traditions interested in sensing, expressing, transmitting, modelling, experiencing, visualizing, understanding, constructing, regulating, manipulating or adapting to emotion in human-human and human-computer interactions. This CHI 2022 workshop on the Future of Emotion in Human-Computer Interaction brings together interested researchers to take stock of research on emotion in HCI to-date and to explore possible futures. Through group discussion and collaborative speculation we will address questions such as: What are the relationships between digital technology and human emotion? What roles does emotion play in HCI research? How should HCI researchers conceptualize emotion? When should HCI researchers use interdisciplinary theories of emotion or create new theory? Can specific emotions be designed for, and where is this knowledge likely to be applied? What are the implications of emotion research for design, ethics and wellbeing? What is the future of emotion in human-computer interaction?
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 it