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 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)0.000
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.982
Threshold uncertainty score0.967

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.086
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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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