Cited by 6,019Emotion and Mood RecognitionFace recognition and analysisFace Recognition and Perception

Facial action coding system

Ekman, Paul, Friesen, Wallace V.·2019·PsycTESTS Dataset

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/t27734-000

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • FOMM learns dense optical flow to support complex motions with fewer artifacts, whereas ICface and FSGAN only use sparse action units or facial landmarks to learn expression and pose, which tend to produce motion artifacts.

    “FOMM learns dense optical low to support complex motions with fewer artifacts, whereas ICface and FSGAN only use sparse action units [13] or facial landmarks to learn the expression and pose, which tend to produce motion artifacts.”

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ekman, P., & Friesen, W. V.
Venue
PsycTESTS Dataset
Published
1978
OpenAlex
W1588539311
Cited by
6,019
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 288 · 2025: 447 · 2024: 367 · 2023: 379 · 2022: 314 · 2021: 204 · 2020: 218 · 2019: 195 · 2018: 227 · 2017: 199 · 2016: 244 · 2015: 233 · 2014: 214 · 2013: 208 · 2012: 174
Type
dataset
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
PsycTESTS Dataset (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Emotion and Mood Recognition
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Face recognition and analysis
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Face Recognition and Perception
Keywords
facial expressions, facial action units, emotion recognition, facial motion

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review