MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414197664 · doi:10.1109/cvprw67362.2025.00573

United We Stand, Divided We Fall: Handling Weak Complementarity for Audio-Visual Emotion Recognition in Valence-Arousal Space

2025· article· en· W4414197664 on OpenAlexaff
R. Gnana Praveen, Jahangir Alam, Éric Charton

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSpeech and Audio Processing
Canadian institutionsComputer Research Institute of Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGatingComplementarity (molecular biology)ModalitiesMechanism (biology)Feature (linguistics)Complement (music)Flexibility (engineering)PoolingInformation flow

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Audio and visual modalities are two predominant contactfree channels in videos, which are often expected to carry a complementary relationship with each other. However, they may not always complement each other, resulting in poor audio-visual feature representations. In this paper, we introduce Gated Recursive Joint Cross Attention (GRJCA) using a gating mechanism that can adaptively choose the most relevant features to effectively capture the synergic relationships across audio and visual modalities. Specifically, we improve the performance of Recursive Joint Cross-Attention (RJCA) by introducing a gating mechanism to control the flow of information between the input features and the attended features of multiple iterations depending on the strength of their complementary relationship. For instance, if the modalities exhibit strong complementary relationships, the gating mechanism emphasizes cross-attended features, otherwise non-attended features. To further improve the performance of the system, we also explored a hierarchical gating approach by introducing a gating mechanism at every iteration, followed by high-level gating across the gated outputs of each iteration. The proposed approach improves the performance of RJCA model by adding more flexibility to deal with weak complementary relationships across audio and visual modalities. Extensive experiments are conducted on the challenging Affwild2 dataset to demonstrate that the proposed approach shows competitive performance, achieving second place in the valence-arousal challenge of the 8th Affective Behavior Analysis in-the-Wild (ABAW) competition. Code is available on GitHub: https://github.com/praveena2j/ABAW8.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.913
Threshold uncertainty score0.716

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.270 · 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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSpeech and Audio ProcessingFrench-language works237,207