The 4th Workshop on Modeling Socio-Emotional and Cognitive Processes from Multimodal Data In-the-Wild (MSECP-Wild)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The ability to automatically infer relevant aspects of human users’ thoughts and feelings is crucial for technologies to adapt their behaviors in complex interactions intelligently (e.g., social robots or tutoring systems). Research on multimodal analysis has demonstrated the potential of technology to provide such estimates for a broad range of internal states and processes. However, constructing robust enough approaches for deployment in real-world applications remains an open problem. The MSECP-Wild workshop series serves as a multidisciplinary forum to present and discuss research addressing this challenge. This 4th iteration focuses on addressing varying contextual conditions (e.g., throughout an interaction or across different situations and environments) in intelligent systems as a crucial barrier for more valid real-world predictions and actions. Submissions to the workshop span efforts relevant to multimodal data collection and context-sensitive modeling. These works provide important impulses for discussions of the state-of-the-art and opportunities for future research on these subjects.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".