MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

ARE Mamba-Based Audio Foundation Models the Best Fit for Non-Verbal Emotion Recognition?

2025· article· W4417053688 on OpenAlexaff
Mohd Mujtaba Akhtar, Orchid Chetia Phukan, Girish, Swarup Ranjan Behera, A. NAYAK, Sanjib Kumar Nayak, Arun Balaji Buduru, Rajesh Sharma

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldPsychology
TopicEmotion and Mood Recognition
Canadian institutionsKootenay Association for Science & Technology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFoundation (evidence)Focus (optics)Function (biology)Emotion recognitionFusionComputational model

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this work, we focus on non-verbal vocal sounds emotion recognition (NVER). We investigate mamba-based audio foundation models (MAFMs) for the first time for NVER and hypothesize that MAFMs will outperform attention-based audio foundation models (AAFMs) for NVER by leveraging its state-space modeling to capture intrinsic emotional structures more effectively. Unlike AAFMs, which may amplify irrelevant patterns due to their attention mechanisms, MAFMs will extract more stable and context-aware representations, enabling better differentiation of subtle non-verbal emotional cues. Our experiments with state-of-the-art (SOTA) AAFMs and MAFMs validates our hypothesis. Further, motivated from related research such as speech emotion recognition, synthetic speech detection, where fusion of foundation models (FMs) have showed improved performance, we also explore fusion of FMs for NVER. To this end, we propose, RENO, that uses renyidivergence as a novel loss function for effective alignment of the FMs. It also makes use of self-attention for better intrarepresentation interaction of the FMs. With RENO, through the heterogeneous fusion of MAFMs and AAFMs, we show the topmost performance in comparison to individual FMs, its fusion and also setting SOTA in comparison to previous SOTA work.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.102
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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