Cited by 2,334Emotion and Mood RecognitionFace and Expression RecognitionContext-Aware Activity Recognition Systems

Toward machine emotional intelligence: analysis of affective physiological state

Picard, R.W., Vyzas, E., Healey, J.·2001·IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence

Abstract

The ability to recognize emotion is one of the hallmarks of emotional intelligence, an aspect of human intelligence that has been argued to be even more important than mathematical and verbal intelligences. This paper proposes that machine intelligence needs to include emotional intelligence and demonstrates results toward this goal: developing a machine's ability to recognize the human affective state given four physiological signals. We describe difficult issues unique to obtaining reliable affective data and collect a large set of data from a subject trying to elicit and experience each of eight emotional states, daily, over multiple weeks. This paper presents and compares multiple algorithms for feature-based recognition of emotional state from this data. We analyze four physiological signals that exhibit problematic day-to-day variations: The features of different emotions on the same day tend to cluster more tightly than do the features of the same emotion on different days. To handle the daily variations, we propose new features and algorithms and compare their performance. We find that the technique of seeding a Fisher Projection with the results of sequential floating forward search improves the performance of the Fisher Projection and provides the highest recognition rates reported to date for classification of affect from physiology: 81 percent recognition accuracy on eight classes of emotion, including neutral.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/34.954607

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Picard, R. W., Vyzas, E., & Healey, J.
Affiliations
  • MIT Media Lab (US)
  • IBM (United States) (US)
Venue
IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence
Published
2001
Volume
23
Issue
10
Pages
1175-1191
ISSN
0162-8828 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2120945046
Cited by
2,334
References
5
Citations by year
2026: 49 · 2025: 138 · 2024: 103 · 2023: 116 · 2022: 99 · 2021: 105 · 2020: 120 · 2019: 147 · 2018: 111 · 2017: 129 · 2016: 112 · 2015: 110 · 2014: 112 · 2013: 126 · 2012: 120
FWCI
26.48
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Emotion and Mood Recognition
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Face and Expression Recognition
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Context-Aware Activity Recognition Systems
Keywords
emotion recognition, physiological data collection, affective computing

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