MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411569198 · doi:10.1007/s44443-025-00094-3

Multi-level fusion with fine-grained alignment for multimodal sentiment analysis

2025· article· en· W4411569198 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Xiaoge Li, Yanan Ma, Xiaochun An, Ren Ping Liu, Yihua Ren

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of King Saud University - Computer and Information Sciences · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSentiment Analysis and Opinion Mining
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSentiment analysisComputer scienceFusionNatural language processingArtificial intelligenceLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Multimodal sentiment analysis (MSA) integrates and processes data from multiple sources, like audio and text, to better understand human emotions through cross-modal interactions. The effective acquisition and integration of meaningful features for constructing richer sentiment representations remains a key challenge in MSA. Most existing methods directly obtain global representations and integrate at the utterance level from different modalities, but this ignores fine-grained representations and makes it difficult to capture intricate relationships within and between modalities. Therefore, we propose a novel method, Fine-grained Multimodal Fusion Network (MMTA). Firstly, a Fine-grained Alignment (FGA) module is introduced to align and extract word-level features to bridge heterogeneous modal gaps. FGA enables word-level alignment between audio, text, and their corresponding contextual information using the Montreal Forced Aligner (MFA). Secondly, a Multi-level Fusion module (MLF) is designed, which captures more cross-modal interaction through three stages: Local-Local Interaction, Local-Global Interaction, and Similarity-weighted Representation Adjustment. Finally, an Attention Fusion Network(AFN) module is developed to capture both inter- and intra-modal correlations, enabling the generation of consistent multimodal representations. Extensive evaluations on widely used MSA datasets, CMU-MOSI and CMU-MOSEI, indicate that our method outperforms prior baselines and validates the effectiveness of the fine-grained alignment and the multi-level fusion for improving multimodal sentiment analysis performance.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.728
Threshold uncertainty score0.319

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.003
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of King Saud University - Computer and Information SciencesSame topicSentiment Analysis and Opinion MiningFrench-language works237,207