MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7083699805 · doi:10.1109/tim.2025.3615268

Transformer-Based Bimodal Emotion Recognition: Signal Measurement and Transformer Fusion Approach

2025· article· en· W7083699805 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation, Psychology, and Social Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersU.S. Department of Commerce
KeywordsFacial expressionPattern recognition (psychology)Sensor fusionElectroencephalographyFusionEmotion recognitionEmotion classificationNeurophysiologyData modeling

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Human emotion plays a fundamental role in cognition, decision-making, and social interactions. Electroencephalography (EEG) is a fundamental widely used neurophysiological measurement tool that records brain electrical activity, providing valuable insights into emotional states. This paper presents a novel transformer-based bimodal emotion recognition model that integrates EEG and facial expression data to enhance multimodal representation learning and emotion classification accuracy. A comprehensive evaluation is conducted by implementing and benchmarking various state-of-the-art unimodal and bimodal emotion recognition models as well as exploring multiple fusion techniques. The model’s performance is validated on two widely used datasets, DEAP and MAHNOB-HCI, where the proposed model outperforms existing approaches in both unimodal and bimodal configurations, achieving an approximate 4% higher accuracy for valence and arousal dimensions. Specifically, for the DEAP dataset, the model attains classification accuracies of 0.66 (valence) and 0.72 (arousal) on the training set and 0.65 (valence) and 0.66 (arousal) on the test set. For the MAHNOB-HCI dataset, it achieves 0.69 (valence) and 0.73 (arousal) on the training set and 0.61 (valence) and 0.68 (arousal) on the test set. Additionally, the proposed transformer-based fusion method outperforms traditional feature-level and decision-level fusion techniques.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.970
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.128
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.242 · 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.

Study designOther design
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and MeasurementSame topicEducation, Psychology, and Social ResearchFrench-language works237,207