Spontaneous Pain Expression Recognition in Video Sequences
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Automatic recognition of Pain expression has potential medical significance. In this paper we present results of the application of an automatic facial expression recognition system on sequences of spontaneous Pain expression. Twenty participants were videotaped while undergoing thermal heat stimulation at nonpainful and painful intensities. Pain was induced experimentally by use of a Peltierbased, computerized thermal stimulator with a 3 × 3 cm 2 contact probe. Our aim is to automatically recognize the videos where Pain was induced. We chose a machine learning approach, previously used successfully to categorize the six basic facial expressions in posed datasets [1, 2] based on the Transferable Belief Model. For this paper, we extended this model to the recognition of sequences of spontaneous Pain expression. The originality of the proposed method is the use of the dynamic information for the recognition of spontaneous Pain expression and the combination of different sensors: facial features behavior, transient features and the context of the expression study. Experimental results show good classification rates for spontaneous Pain sequences especially when we use the contextual information. Moreover the system behaviour compares favourably to the human observer in the other case, which opens promising perspectives for the future development of the proposed system.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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".