MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Enhancing Generalization in PPG-Based Emotion Measurement with a CNN-TCN-LSTM Model

2025· article· en· W4412966309 on OpenAlexaff
Karim Alghoul, Hussein Al Osman, Abdulmotaleb El Saddik

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEmotion and Mood Recognition
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeneralizationComputer scienceArtificial intelligencePattern recognition (psychology)Cellular neural networkArtificial neural networkMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Human-computer interaction has become integral to modern life, driven by advancements in machine learning technologies. Affective computing, in particular, has focused on systems that recognize, interpret, and respond to human emotions, often using wearable devices, which provide continuous data streams of physiological signals. Among various physiological signals, the photoplethysmogram (PPG) has gained prominence due to its ease of acquisition from widely available devices. However, the generalization of PPG-based emotion recognition models across individuals remains an unresolved challenge. This paper introduces a novel hybrid architecture that combines Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs), Long Short-Term Memory networks (LSTMs), and Temporal Convolutional Networks (TCNs) to address this issue. The proposed model integrates the strengths of these architectures to improve robustness and generalization. Raw PPG signals are fed into the CNN for feature extraction. These features are processed separately by LSTM and TCN. The outputs from these components are concatenated to generate a final feature representation, which serves as the input for classifying valence and arousal, the primary dimensions of emotion. Experiments using the Photoplethysmogram Dataset for Emotional Analysis (PPGE) demonstrate that the proposed hybrid model achieves better model generalization than standalone CNN and LSTM architectures. Our results show that the proposed solution outperforms the state-of-the-art CNN architecture, as well as a CNN-LSTM model, in emotion recognition tasks with PPG signals. Using metrics such as Area Under the Curve (AUC) and F1 Score, we highlight the model’s effectiveness in handling subject variability.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.892
Threshold uncertainty score0.518

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.258 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEmotion and Mood RecognitionFrench-language works237,207