Bibliographic record
Abstract
Emotion detection is a crucial component of Games User Research (GUR), as it allows game developers to gain insights into players’ emotional experiences and tailor their games accordingly. However, detecting emotions in Virtual Reality (VR) games is challenging due to the Head-Mounted Display (HMD) that covers the top part of the player’s face, namely, their eyes and eyebrows, which provide crucial information for recognizing the impression. To tackle this we used a Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) to train a model to predict emotions in full-face images where the eyes and eyebrows are covered. We used the FER2013 dataset, which we modified to cover eyes and eyebrows in images. The model in these images can accurately recognize seven different emotions which are anger, happiness, disgust, fear, impartiality, sadness and surprise.We assessed the model’s performance by testing it on two VR games and using it to detect players’ emotions. We collected self-reported emotion data from the players after the gameplay sessions. We analyzed the data collected from our experiment to understand which emotions players experience during the gameplay. We found that our approach has the potential to enhance gameplay analysis by enabling the detection of players’ emotions in VR games, which can help game developers create more engaging and immersive game experiences.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".