MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4366003342 · doi:10.1145/3579495

I See What You're Hearing: Facilitating The Effect of Environment on Perceived Emotion While Teleconferencing

2023· article· en· W4366003342 on OpenAlexafffund
David Marino, Max Henry, Pascal E. Fortin, Rachit Bhayana, Jeremy R. Cooperstock

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMusic and Audio Processing
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersCentre for Interdisciplinary Research in Music Media and Technology
KeywordsPerceptionVideoconferencingFraming (construction)PsychologyContext (archaeology)Computer scienceNarrativeAffect (linguistics)Human–computer interactionCognitive psychologyMultimediaCommunicationEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Our perception of emotion is highly contextual. Changes in the environment can affect our narrative framing, and thus augment our emotional perception of interlocutors. User environments are typically heavily suppressed due to the technical limitations of commercial videoconferencing platforms. As a result, there is often a lack of contextual awareness while participating in a video call, and this affects how we perceive the emotions of conversants. We present a videoconferencing module that visualizes the user's aural environment to enhance awareness between interlocutors. The system visualizes environmental sound based on its semantic and acoustic properties. We found that our visualization system was about 50% effective at eliciting emotional perceptions in users that was similar to the response elicited by environmental sound it replaced.The contributed system provides a unique approach to facilitate ambient awareness on an implicit emotional level in situations where multimodal environmental context is suppressed.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.622
Threshold uncertainty score0.582

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 communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.234 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer InteractionSame topicMusic and Audio ProcessingFrench-language works237,207