MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Affective State Recognition with Convolutional Autoencoders

2022· article· en· W4294975018 on OpenAlexafffund
Svetlana Rovinska, Naimul Khan

Bibliographic record

Venue2022 44th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine & Biology Society (EMBC) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEmotion and Mood Recognition
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceOverfittingConvolutional neural networkFeature extractionPattern recognition (psychology)Deep learningMachine learningActivity recognitionClassifier (UML)Artificial neural network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this study was to create a robust generalizable model to classify person's affective state based on physiological signals obtained using wearable sensor devices. Traditional machine learning methods require manual feature extraction from time sequences. Deep learning methods, such as Convolutional Neural Networks (CNN), can automatically extract features from time sequences. However, CNN models can be prone to overfitting, especially when the dataset is small. We apply a novel idea of using unsupervised convolutional autoencoders to automatically extract features from time-series data that are then fed to supervised classifier to classify people's affective state. We achieve almost 3% accuracy increase over traditional CNN model using all physio data from WESAD dataset, 2% increase using chest only physio data, and 8% increase using wrist only physio data while classifying neutral, stress, and amusement states. Code to reproduce the results can be found at https://github.com/srovins/wesad Clinical Relevance- A high-performing affective state recognition system can be utilized for various medical applications, ranging from patient monitoring to cognitive therapy.

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 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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.289
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.049
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.266 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations5
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2022 44th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine & Biology Society (EMBC)Same topicEmotion and Mood RecognitionFrench-language works237,207