MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388657569 · doi:10.1145/3632960

Contrastive Learning of View-invariant Representations for Facial Expressions Recognition

2023· article· en· W4388657569 on OpenAlexafffund
Shuvendu Roy, Ali Etemad

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Multimedia Computing Communications and Applications · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEmotion and Mood Recognition
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersMitacs
KeywordsInvariant (physics)Computer scienceFacial expressionArtificial intelligencePattern recognition (psychology)InferenceEmbeddingRedundancy (engineering)Expression (computer science)Speech recognitionMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although there has been much progress in the area of facial expression recognition (FER), most existing methods suffer when presented with images that have been captured from viewing angles that are non-frontal and substantially different from those used in the training process. In this article, we propose ViewFX, a novel view-invariant FER framework based on contrastive learning, capable of accurately classifying facial expressions regardless of the input viewing angles during inference. ViewFX learns view-invariant features of expression using a proposed self-supervised contrastive loss, which brings together different views of the same subject with a particular expression in the embedding space. We also introduce a supervised contrastive loss to push the learned view-invariant features of each expression away from other expressions. Since facial expressions are often distinguished with very subtle differences in the learned feature space, we incorporate the Barlow twins loss to reduce the redundancy and correlations of the representations in the learned representations. The proposed method is a substantial extension of our previously proposed CL-MEx, which only had a self-supervised loss. We test the proposed framework on two public multi-view facial expression recognition datasets, KDEF and DDCF. The experiments demonstrate that our approach outperforms previous works in the area and sets a new state-of-the-art for both datasets while showing considerably less sensitivity to challenging angles and the number of output labels used for training. We also perform detailed sensitivity and ablation experiments to evaluate the impact of different components of our model as well as its sensitivity to different parameters.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.380
Teacher spread0.294 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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 venueACM Transactions on Multimedia Computing Communications and ApplicationsSame topicEmotion and Mood RecognitionFrench-language works237,207